GaryPinC

Well, the hurricane hunters (Air Force Reserve unit) came to officially be in 1946, measuring hurricane speeds. If you assume their measurement instrumentation was sound back then, and they investigated all hurricanes (which is not a given considering the lack of satellites), and they consistently checked hurricane speed as well as today then you have some facts: -the longest duration of a category 5 was back in 1932. Of course this was not official weather unit monitoring. -Only in six seasons—1932, 1933, 1961, 2005, 2007 and 2017—has more than one Category 5 hurricane formed. -Only in 2005 have more than two Category 5 hurricanes formed, and only in 2007 and 2017 did more than one make landfall at Category 5 strength. -The years 2016 through 2019 are the longest sequence of consecutive years which all featured at least one Category 5 hurricane each. -Officially, the decade with the most Category 5 hurricanes is 2000–2009, with eight Category 5 hurricanes having occurred. -The previous decades with the most Category 5 hurricanes were the 1930s and 1960s, with six occurring between 1930 and 1939. Of course this was not official weather unit monitoring during the 30s. So, a legitimate argument can be made that they are increasing in intensity (partial points for you), but given the relatively short sampling record(reliably also!) I would say it's trending but about 10-20 more years are needed to fully validate this assertion.

Where's the evidence of doubling per decade you claim? Hurricane activity is CYCLICAL. The early 1980's were a period of unusually low major hurricanes. Cherry picking. Can't say that if you compare 1945-55 with the last 20 years. But more cherry picking. You have the data from my previous post. The 1970's only suggest an increase but how does that compare to within the last 5 or 6 years? major hurricanes: 1970 : 5 2013: 0 1971: 6 2014: 6 1972: 0 2015: 6 1973: 4 2016: 4 1974: 4 2017: 6 1975: 6 2018: 2 1976: 6 1977: 5 1978: 5 1979: 6 It simply proves the bias present in science. We must all exercise curiosity and independent thought.

You claim you believe the scientists? These are actual data from NOAA and university of Arizona. You know, scientists, and not projecting with computer modeling. Kindly explain how the number of severe hurricanes has doubled over the last few decades? Number of hurricanes would be the blue bars in the first 2 graphs, severe hurricanes in red the last graph. Let me help you out, severe hurricanes in the last graph in red, since it ends with 2015 I chose my decades, 2015-2006, 2005-1996, etc. Number of severe hurricanes by decade: 2015-2006: 59 2005-1996: 82 1995-1986: 46 1985-1976: 55 1975-1966: 50 1965-1956: 53 1955-1946: 71 Let's keep it simple, explain 71 severe hurricanes from 1946-1955 compared to 59 from 2006-2015 and where it keeps doubling?

Yeah, I felt Jackson was always a stronger dark horse candidate from that draft year than the experts would allow. He looked bad in college because he needed to learn how to situationally throw a ball, I mean the guy just shotgun blasted every throw no matter the yardage. But you could also see his ability to read the field and make good decisions. So it's interesting to follow him and I don't believe the Ravens get rid of Flacco's experience in running an offense unless they have utmost confidence in Jackson.

Watching the replay, it was low and slightly behind, Beasley quickly knelt and I thought the throw was so fast it bounced off his thigh as he was getting his hands on the ball and that's why it popped up so much.

Again, I get where you're coming from on this. The FBI ignored Wilson because Steele's info was considered much more reliable to the FISC court than Wilson's. But this article doesn't tie the tinkle tape to Wilson nor the fact that he worked with Fusion. The article seems to have the perspective that the FBI talking to Wilson would have debunked all of Simpson/Steele's claims, since Wilson was never in the campaign and never sued. My point is the FBI's initial review of the tip may have caused them to drop it as unreliable.

That's fine, but the article doesn't go into all that and doesn't seem to realize all of those details. Here is the last sentence of the article: To test the hypothesis that Steele and Simpson had reliable information, all the FBI agents needed to do was call Rick Wilson. They didn’t pick up the phone. My simple point is why should the FBI pick up the phone when Simpson's statement is clearly disproven with a simple investigation? Just a really poor article IMO

Ummm, because Rick Wilson is a "never Trumper" who never even worked on the Presidential campaign?

Great post and good thoughts on game 3. Gore continues to gain yards after contact, McCoy does not. And on McCoy's long preseason run, he looked reasonably fast except that his running style was really off from past years. Really jerky and not smooth anymore. I liked having LeSean and wish him the best in KC, but no way is he a workhorse back anymore. FO did the right thing.

I wonder if Beane talked punter when negotiating for Wyatt Teller?

I hear ya, but as having been through many rounds of layoffs there's a difference between the boss who gives weak lie and pleads ignorance/avoids the subject versus the boss that completely lies to you at length. Understand the former, mistrust the latter.

The biggest disappointment about the Shady cut was how strongly the FO was endorsing him before and into training camp. I feel like they could have been more neutral about him and have maybe created some mistrust within the locker room? Clearly bringing in Gore, Yeldon, Singletary, showed they were concerned about McCoy, which I was happy to see. But I was confused by how willing they were to continue talk him up.

Yeah, but I hope she tries it. That was a kickoff run-up and it's a lot easier to hit that kind of distance. A two step field goal in under 2 seconds under pressure is a different matter but she sounds like she would get someone to teach/train her. You'd need a different kicker to kickoff but if she retains enough power she could be reliable out to 45 yards. I doubt she could ever do 50+ as a legit field goal.

BB was there one year before they drafted Brady. But beyond that, BB didn't focus on culture until after Brady came. But Cassel leading them to 11-5 with Brady out invalidates your argument. Anyone who looks at the Packers situation understands that McCarthy/Rodgers relationship fell apart only the last few seasons and front office problems/lack of new talent killed the winning culture that they had enjoyed. The Browns new winning culture has started in the front office and needs to be fully developed in the locker room. Certainly it is heavily tied to Mayfield at the moment but that is a talented roster and developing a winning culture will dictate how far they go in the playoffs. I am not confusing history with culture. Culture is multi layered and different for every winning team but to sustain winning you need the right talent, the right HC/QB combo, and the right culture. As critical as the QB is, it's still a team game. Again, the bickering Bills is just a blatant example of this. Why do you ignore it?

The entire direction reffing is taking is counterproductive to the game. The PI challenge is so stupid. Give the ref in the booth or NY authority to stop the game and review the play if something egregious is missed like for NO last season. Maybe even only in the last 5 minutes of each half. We're getting OCD about every call and it just kills the game flow.

Amazing. Let's back up a minute and consider culture. Team culture comes from many areas. The owners, GM, front office, coaches, players, and finally the fans. Each of these may have a positive, negative or neutral influence on the culture. It's undeniable your front office has to bring in talent, especially a quarterback, and your coaches have to use it effectively over years for sustained success. But how much the owners, GM, front office, coaches, and players put the success of the team first, as a group, will determine long term success. What about the Ravens winning superbowls with Dilfer and Flacco? No elite QB's there, just elite defenses because of their hard-nosed team culture. New England: Cassel, Garappolo, and Brissett. The other quarterbacks who went in for Brady. How'd they do? How'd they do when they left New England? That's a winning culture. Seattle: Legion of Boom, Carrol wasn't just about his quarterback Pittsburgh and the Pack: if you deny the culture these teams have or have had until recently, it's probably pointless to discuss with you. Let's instead look at our Bills: What culture did Ralph instill while he owned the team? Only lucked out having one good GM and managed to run him out of town. Or hiring Buddy Nix to be GM? Constantly interfering with the front office, mostly bad judgement in hiring coaches, GM's. Conservative with spending if the team was not winning. That's a culture setter commiserate with the team's lack of success. Most good GM's knew they didn't want a boss like that. That's a huge cultural hit, much like the Cleveland Browns have enjoyed before Haslem hired Dorsey and stepped out of the way. When did the culture in Cleveland finally change? With Dorsey and the day Haslem finally let him fire Hue Jackson. Plus, Greggo was rightly given the boot after the season because that would be some bad culture to retain. Greggo did preside over the success of the Browns last year. Back to the Bills super bowl years. Good front office, Levy. Bickering Bills. They worked it out in the locker room, the culture improved and away they went. Kelly had already been in place since 1986, yes? 12-4 in 88, 9-7 in 89 bicker, bicker. The players united the locker room and set the culture by 1990. Hello super bowls. What say you to this prime example of team culture being important?

You can debate the importance of culture all you like, but winning is NOT culture. And certainly culture alone will not guarantee winning, talent is also needed. What teams do you feel have won consistently (5 years or more) with a bad culture? Certainly winning will encourage the culture but winning will not be sustained in a bad culture. Seahawks: Yes, they did develop the culture first. Pete Carroll game to the Seahawks in 2010. Took his culture and roster turnover 2 years to get going. There's plenty of articles on it https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/17555/renowned-psychologist-impressed-with-seahawks-culture-of-grit http://old.seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2022617012_seahawks08xml.html So ironic you use the Patriots. Belichick came in 2000 and is all about the culture. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/13/bill-belichick-leadership-rules.html https://cbssportsradio.radio.com/articles/former-player-discusses-bill-belichick-new-england-patriots-culture https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinandjackiefreiberg/2019/02/04/the-belichick-brady-way-10-lessons-from-the-patriots-about-the-art-of-execution/#28f98a854c68 https://www.thescore.com/nfl/news/1791312 https://www.complex.com/sports/2018/05/current-former-patriots-respond-pats-culture-fun Green Bay: Look at the turmoil with their front office the last two years. They still have Aaron Rodgers. Why are they not winning? How about cultural issues and a culture shift in the front office? Certainly their FO may not be bringing in enough talent but there's been a distinct culture shift at the top. https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/05/09/silverstein-critics-see-cracks-green-bay-packers-new-management-structure/1142267001/ https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/11/29/green-bay-packers-problems-aaron-rodgers-mike-mccarthy-ted-thompson And you left out the Steelers, one of the strongest culture driven teams in the NFL. Last year the breakdown of that culture was deeply concerning for former players and fans. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001027011/article/eventful-offseason-puts-pittsburgh-steelers-culture-in-spotlight It'll be interesting to see how they do this year if they recover their culture with an aging Roethlisberger.

I'll try and show you tonight why I feel the robe triangles are not the same. I'm not very good at pulling parts of images and I'll need to do it at home. It's not about politics for me either. I'm fed up with either party. As far as some of your pyramid pictures, check this link out which accounts for almost all your people making the triangle with both hands. https://illuminatisymbols.info/roc-sign/ It signifies Jay Z's Roc Nation entertainment company not some ancient occult. It seems a number of celebrities, including Warren Buffet, flashed it at Jay Z's 40/40 club opening in 2012. My point to you is that perhaps things are not always as widespread as they seem.

First off, I certainly commend you for being on point with Epstein and the pedo problem in this country. It is shocking and undeniable to me. The pedo symbols I have only learned about through this thread, so thank you for that also. These symbols were carefully chosen by pedos and their purpose is explained well in the FBI document. The symbols on the cloth are NOT the same as the standard pedo symbols. The cloth is a normal open swirl inside a triangle, not the scribble with subtle but distinct characteristics. You want to claim this is a new pedo symbol, fine, but provide some proof. The reason I draw distinction is that circular swirl symbols are indeed commonplace, but that doesn't mean they are placed there by a pedo. What has happened already is overzealous targeting of reputable pizza restaurants and donut shops, and that should bother you and anyone who considers themselves intellectually honest.

You're right, when I mag it up all the way it's a bit obscured so I'm less certain but it still does appear to be a triangle with a smiley face near the bottom. Do you know what it is? I used it because it looks even less like the FBI pedo symbols to me.

The only one who has no f-ing clue about bird hunting is you. You are unlikely to die, but the chance of getting shot can be very large. Once a covey of quail go up, 3 dimensionally they can and will fly any direction except straight into the ground. It is hard enough to gun track a single bird in that chaos, let alone decide if a shot is safe in those couple seconds before the bird is out of range. Hunter party positions and safe shooting angles are worked out before the flush ever happens. Cheney's buddy went back to the truck and popped back unannounced at the moment a covey flushes. Incredibly bad luck but he should have announced himself well before then. But, to throw you a bone, they claimed Cheney shot him at 50 yards, which is garbage as the 9 shot probably couldn't even break skin at that range. The pattern spread (lower face and torso) and chest wall penetration suggest to me the shot occured around 15-20yards.

Thanks I saw those and neither match up to the symbol on the cloth. The cloth symbol is different.

That head is very disturbing but the symbols on the cloth are a triangle with a circular spiral or even wave inside of them, not a known pedophile symbol. The triangle on the forehead actually has a smiley face inside of it. I don't know what it means but the symbols do not appear to be what you imply they are. Certainly the artist has an odd way of drawing hands but I don't see 6 fingers on any of them. The "scorpions" are shoe laces, on the original painting they are less defined than your posted images making me wonder if someone's been taking some artistic liberty.

There's no doubt a certain percent of players are going to try and hide a concussion, especially mild. But these days there are standardized protocols, mandatory checks for obvious blows to the head and baseline control testing players much match if it is suspected they sustained a concussion. You make it sound like there's a large amount of players hiding their concussions and I truly doubt that. All of sports are far more cautious and proactive about it then even 10 years ago.

The story says the families were neighbors. I guess the mailman delivered to the wrong mailbox that day. Just disgusting and I don't know anyone involved but it makes sense that Malone would try like hell to avoid all involvement in this because he did commit a crime.