Liar, liar, pants on fire!

[Gemini Dreams]

Rampant bigoted internet anonymity is proportional to superfluous post count and perceived worth of avatar.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Gemini Dreams

Rampant bigoted internet anonymity is proportional to superfluous post count and perceived worth of avatar.

Wow! Deep stuff!

[IdoraKeeper]

Originally Posted by boatsail

If your post had less spelling errors, I might take it seriously.

Those are not spelling errors, it colloquialism.......

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by IdoraKeeper

Those are not spelling errors, it colloquialism.......

Those are not spelling errors, IT'S colloquialism.......

[zeehag]

RODLMFAO

[Gemini Dreams]

Originally Posted by boatsail

If your post had less spelling errors, I might take it seriously.

"
43: A knyght ther was, and that a worthy man,
44: That fro the tyme that he first bigan
45: To riden out, he loved chivalrie,
46: Trouthe and honour, fredom and curteisie.
47: Ful worthy was he in his lordes werre,
48: And therto hadde he riden, no man ferre,
49: As wel in cristendom as in hethenesse,
50: And evere honoured for his worthynesse.
51: At alisaundre he was whan it was wonne.
52: Ful ofte tyme he hadde the bord bigonne
53: Aboven alle nacions in pruce;
54: In lettow hadde he reysed and in ruce,
55: No cristen man so ofte of his degree.
56: In gernade at the seege eek hadde he be
57: Of algezir, and riden in belmarye.
58: At lyeys was he and at satalye,
59: Whan they were wonne; and in the grete see
60: At many a noble armee hadde he be.
61: At mortal batailles hadde he been fiftene,
62: And foughten for oure feith at tramyssene
63: In lystes thries, and ay slayn his foo.
64: This ilke worthy knyght hadde been also
65: Somtyme with the lord of palatye
66: Agayn another hethen in turkye.
67: And everemoore he hadde a sovereyn prys;
68: And though that he were worthy, he was wys,
69: And of his port as meeke as is a mayde.
70: He nevere yet no vileynye ne sayde
71: In al his lyf unto no maner wight.
72: He was a verray, parfit gentil knyght.
73: But, for to tellen yow of his array,
74: His hors were goode, but he was nat gay.
75: Of fustian he wered a gypon
76: Al bismotered with his habergeon,
77: For he was late ycome from his viage,
78: And wente for to doon his pilgrymage."GC

We are in the most rampant evolution of the English Language since Chaucer. Nothing is wrong, if it is close enough to communicate then the Hooked on Phonics teacher gives them a gold star.

W

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I dont know, I have the popcorn in and waiting for the Tomahawk airshow to begin....

dave

And Dave, that is all it will be....."The Obama Show." Maybe he should just spank them and ask "Pretty please, stop that stuff! I have a red line, don't you remember?"

[goboatingnow]

We are in the most rampant evolution of the English Language since Chaucer. Nothing is wrong, if it is close enough to communicate then the Hooked on Phonics teacher gives them a gold star.

well its now the closest thing we have to a world language. Since it gets modified by all sorts of other non native speakers, its not surprising it has morphed into a kind of grammatically and syntactically jelly of a language. and all the better,

dave

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by foggysail

And Dave, that is all it will be....."The Obama Show." Maybe he should just spank them and ask "Pretty please, stop that stuff! I have a red line, don't you remember?"

Im a sucker for a spanking , err..... at least it wont be a GWB show, that really hurt the ratings

dave

[IdoraKeeper]

Originally Posted by foggysail

And Dave, that is all it will be....."The Obama Show." Maybe he should just spank them and ask "Pretty please, stop that stuff! I have a red line, don't you remember?"

warning, warning------politics and anchors and guns.....lookout below!

[Delancey]

Originally Posted by IdoraKeeper

My pants are not on fire, but my hair is (or what's left of it). You should not put threads like this on the internet it encourages Lairing and ignoramusness.
It better stop raining I need to load groceries onto the boat.

You claim your hair is on fire but your pants are not and provide no further details. You further indicate you are missing some of your hair but do not say how much. How much hair? What color and what material are the pants made from? Details please. I am seriously starting to wonder if the claim that your hair is on fire is truthful. IMO you should call 911

[svmariane]

Well, I can't be bothered by reading the whole thread to see what others might think, or if dozens have already posted what I'm about to say, so I'll just jump in and post my comment, being absolutely positive (and, indeed, quite sure) that what I intend to post will be of valuable assistance to not only the original poster (sometimes referred to as the OP by others) but to newbie and (whether they'll admit it or not) seasoned sailors, because what I have to say is based upon experience - real life experience - in most cases (except where it's not, but then you don't need to know that) so it's a given that you (and others) will learn from what I am about to post.

Now then... Ummmm What was the topic again?

[zeehag]

PICTURES OR IT DIDNT HAPPEN..MUST HAVE PIX OF HAIR ON FIRE AND PANTS ON FIRE ALSO.

[Khagan1227]

Originally Posted by IdoraKeeper

My pants are not on fire, but my hair is (or what's left of it). You should not put threads like this on the internet it encourages Lairing and ignoramusness.
It better stop raining I need to load groceries onto the boat.

Please do NOT group the liars in with us ignoramuses, we are sensitive and besides we don't know enough to lie.

[psneeld]

RF never got "flamed".... I was civil , to the point, and accurate by pointing out an old thread that contained "the same story"....which I knew was the same and could have ended completely different. I also posted info and links to why or why not points made were accurate.

My points of interest in both threads (that one and the one I linked) were:

1) The USCG does not normally if rarely "force captains off their boat" just because some of the crew is removed.
2) The USCG definitely doesn't tell you to scuttle your boat...except in the most extraordinary case...that I would bet money on. (and the story given was not extraordinary)

In both threads someone got very upset that the story was questioned and dug their heels in....if the first time you told a story on CF and it got bashed for the same reasons by more than one poster...would you did your heels in and try it again???? Does that sound reasonable?

All I ever asked for was some tidbit to see if any of the story was true so others would know what really goes on out there. Having been in the air, on the water or in the operations center for thousands of SAR cases....I hope nobody is calling me "armchair anything".

At any point in both threads, the slightest hint that the "original reporting source" may have been in error would have slackened the debate. Instead it went the way of insisting that I must be in error (despite my knowledge of SAR and the quick posting of relevant links) and then being negative about not helping with a "drogue" diversion???? Gimme a break.....

To many I am sorry that it turned out in a way that you feel was malicious...but the topic and reference to the USCG are near and dear to me and I certainly feel I have the room to comment on references to their involvement in SAR and how it might affect others.