but this is a ruse too.

the split between two halves of the same esurient pack of jackals can only be a gift IF they spend their energy against each other to allow their quarry to reevaluate their situation (escape).

'tho some of those on a smoking pile of manure end up burning.

and the recent 'flexing'...

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. - Isaac Asimov

Quarrying marble just fascinates me.

(Coprolite Preservation Managed)

chingalera says...(Chingalera Profile Page)
Below is an example of 'baiting'. I made the public announcement that I would be taking a hiatus from the site to draw-out the quarry: A person who would use his time spraying graffiti on a user's private personal area with a view to no resolution or truth, no self-awareness with the hope of a mutual understanding, rather than engaging in a civil and private discussion about his particular beef with me, chicco now comes with Krylon in-hand.

Unable to defend the indefensible, he degrades into personal-attacks and provocation with a single goal in mind-To attempt to compromise my integrity and provoke some public outburst.

Ain't gonna happen this time sir. I call bullshit when I see it, always have, always will.
5 hours 24 minutes ago up0downflag spam (0)ignore

chingalera says...
As I have asked civilly of you many times chicco, I would appreciate you not making comments to my profile page anything but a private matter. Again, and as have others I have asked (as I extend the courtesy to all, up-front) you simply ignore my requests of decorum because you understand that it is perhaps a type of balm for your self-injury this pestering me and poking at me personally. You rudely disregard this civil request made several times.

Ok, if you think it's a clever trap then that's what it is...a simpler explanation may very well be that once again one or a team of sophomoric pricks have a personal hard-on to see someone burn so they come to shit all over their profile page in that user's absence. This has been perpetrated before by other pricks with the same m.o. and those all tend to remain long-gone, but the flavor after the waft of their of shit continues to linger.

Again, no respect for my privacy.

(To the community-at-large, I continually ask chichorrea whom I have rubbed the wrong way by exposing his unilateral weakness to having his lying and cruelty exposed to remain private in spewing bile upon my profile page an in my absence, he instead litters it like some billboard advertisement announcing 'horseshit for sale')

If you are bound and determined with your unilateral project chicco and you know I'll bite to defend my integrity, why not wait until I come back to participate on this site with the community in-mind before throwing pebbles at my back door?

Who is actually displaying the cowardice here? Really?!

chicchorea said:
...oh, and here too....

There have been a number of posts whereby your conspicuous and transparent absence of response amply confirms all of my, and others' long before me, assertions about your dishonesty and cowardice. Further, your uncharacteristic cleaning house via deleting your profile pages of comments and most notably mine but retaining those of Newtboy whom you think you have bettered is telling as well.

...jailbaited you with this rat trap and you were all over it though. Weak minded and predictable you are.

You cannot refute that which I have repeatedly and amply purported and you dare not challenge me to evidentially support what I have lain down so you run and hide just occasionally sticking your head up to spew your drivel only to duck and cover again.

Run,,,run 'little...thing"...run.

I will be waiting. As you said where you should have not, "ain't done bruhh..."
6 hours 42 minutes ago up0downflag spam (0)ignore

They often do the events at volcanic quarries or volcanoes, so the landings are usually fairly soft (not always).
It's often the case that no one 'makes it' (to 'make it' you have to stop all the way at the top past the last markers and often turn around and drive back down, 3:35 didn't stop or even pass the markers), so they measure who made it the farthest up.

Recycled mix (using old asphalt with other "stuff" that can be put into mix to get rid of it..like rubber tires) doesn't lay as well as new asphalt mix or hold up as well.

Since old mix uses old asphalt, it typically has oil, gasoline, diesel, etc soaked into it. All of these substances degrade/eat asphalt over time. It's why they don't use asphalt around fuel pumps, because all of the constant and pure spillage would eat holes in it. Turns the asphalt gummy...goes right into it and sometimes thru to the sub-grade rock and then soil. Also motorcycle kick stands don't do well on asphalt, contaminated or not..especially on hot days. Asphalt will become pliable on really hot days and a focused direct pressure like a motorcycle kickstand can punch a hole into it that be deep enough to let the bike tip over. Use a wood block or piece of plywood to fix this and spread the pressure.

I used to work in the asphalt business, mostly rolling it. My dad worked in it more substantially than myself working on airport jobs, highways, etc. Many of those jobs won't allow old asphalt to be used in their mix. And they are big enough to force plants to switch over from remixed (old and new) to all new mixes. You'll notice that jobs done with the new mixes hold up much longer, look better, lay better, hold their heat better during the laying process, and come out much smoother looking and less "dirty looking" upon finish. I am guessing at this, but I believe it to be because the asphalt has more tar and less other chemicals and the tar is able to absorb any dirt you might pick up when you move to existing surfaces onto the new asphalt. Where the remix (containing old) has gasoline, etc breaking down the tar and less fresh tar to begin with, so that little bit of dirt you pick up transfers to the remix asphalt like a magnet.

Highways probably won't have as much surface area covered in long term spillage as stop and go traffic where it will be focused at the lights, stop signs, along edge of the streets where people park. But the highway will have big sections of highly contaminated asphalt where semis flip, car wrecks occur, etc. So these same sections if they are remixing it on the go, will end up with a bunch of really bad asphalt on or just after it if they don't throw it out.

And to clarify a few things upon incase people are unfamiliar.

Asphalt plants are usually multi purpose. They are usually a stone quarry with an asphalt plant situated somewhere on site. They filter and crush the stone into piles for sub grade work of various needs. And they draw from these piles to feed the asphalt plant. They do new mix and recycled mix (old mix) which I'll explain below. They also often times have sealer (the black coating you put on parking lots and driveways), I'll explain it below. Roofing tar, regular/asphalt tar, and crack filler..and I'll cover these below as well.

The plants have some human guesswork involved, they have to estimate tonnage and how much tar should be added. They screw up pretty often. It wasn't unheard of for us to get super tarry asphalt mixes where it was like goo coming out of the truck. Or no-tar mixes where it was just slightly black painted rocks. Or mixes where we called them "burnt" where they pumped in their cleaning mixture into the mix and it was breaking down the mixture to help get it out of the hoppers of the plant. These were usually people being trained who hit the wrong button without realizing it.

The plants have to clean the mixtures out of the hopper (where they dump it into the truck) to cycle over to a new mixture they keep in on-site silo looking things that stir and heat it. Which the silos also have to be cleaned at the end of the day or heated all night lest they hardened and stop up the whole thing. They usually stop heating all night as it gets closer to winter season because they don't do enough business to make it worthwhile.

Ok mixtures:

I didn't mention base mix anywhere...but it's why they typically have to switch over to different mixes, because places need base mix instead of finish layer....the layer you see when finished looks less rocky than base and is pliable.

Base mix = larger aggregate rocks, much more rocky. Doesn't have much fine rock in it. It's meant to be something you can quickly lay that will hold up the weight of heavy vehicles right away. Usually this is only used on fresh roadways where they are laying directly over rock sub-grades. It makes it easier to lay the finish layer smoothly, makes for a cleaner looking job by locking the rock and it's dust in...and is cheaper than using all finish. You can almost go from laying base mix to laying finish layer right on top of it with no delay. You can't do this with two layers of finish, because it's too pliable and it has to cool down for the heavy vehicles to drive over it without squishing it out and messing up the layer you just laid.

New mix asphalt = Tar mixture with aggregate like fine almost sand like rocks along with larger rocks to give it stability larger rocks are maybe the size of your pinkie nail at the largest. Tar is mixed throughout, the whole mix is constantly stirred and heated inside the plant, drawn into the hopper and dumped in a truck that pulls underneath. I am told that this mix used to be even better in the past, but now air regulations require them to "inject" their dust from rock crushing into the mixes so again this can cause the mix to be less tarry due to the dust being absorbed and they can completely ruin it by injecting too much.

SCAM ALERT: Look below remix as it pertains to both.

Remix (old and new) asphalt = Very similar to new mix, except they grind up old asphalt that they have sitting on-site in the stone quarry congealing into a big pile depending on it's contamination. This will depend on percentage they are legally required/allowed to put into these mixes. Less of the remix in the mixture, the better it is....less contaminates. Sometimes they even put rubber tires and other rubber products into the mixture. Although they don't do that much here. SOMETIMES it is desirable to have rubber in the mixture like running tracks, where they are springy. This is a special mixture, and it's a massive PITA to lay because it's really gummy and sticks to everything along the process.

SCAM ALERT: They typically do this to older people. But someone will stop and tell you they are working on a big site close, and they are going to have some extra material at the end. Usually you would dump this at the plant or somewhere you have set aside. They want to help you get a new looking driveway. They will lay the asphalt less than an inch thick. It will look really good when they finish. A year later it will be broken apart in most cases. Because they didn't tar, and they laid it too thin. You can lay asphalt thinner if you tar really well....but you want to lay it at least a inch and a half per layer or so. Sometimes you have to lay it thin near man holes and drains to not block water. So don't go crazy on somebody because of this if you see them doing it in certain places. Generally they try to average an inch and a half across a job per layer on finish. Thicker on base mixes since it has larger rocks in it and it has to be at least as thick as the biggest rock in it.

Sealer (the black coating you put on parking lots and driveways) - This is almost like a black paint in some circumstances. Some of it has chemicals, I think creosote, which react to the sunlight and cure it to seal it to the asphalt. Depending on what you buy, you may have to mix water into it to make it suitable for the task. Some come pre-mixed and you just have to stir. Usually you put two coatings on new asphalt, one coat if it's been sealed before. Sealer WILL NOT make your driveway last longer by any noticeable degree. It will make it look dark, and repel chemical spills to some degree. However chemicals will still penetrate as you can't clean up everything that drops. ALSO, sealer makes your driveway much slicker. This is why they don't use sealer on roadways, if they are using some kind of treatment it's something else because sealer fills in all of the fine holes in asphalt and makes it more slippery because of this..especially in the rain. Sealer has to cure for a couple days, you can't drive on it and it can't get wet. So listen to them when they say they don't want to seal it due to weather. Don't let them seal it in the spring or fall. Do it in the summer so it's nice and hot and not much moisture. Sealer looks more brown going down than black. But it cures to black.....it almost looks like chocolate cake mix. Dunno if they taste the same.

If you are sealing your own driveway, do not get it on you. It burns like a mother, I've gotten it on myself and if you don't clean it off right away it will burn you like a really bad sunburn after being exposed to sunlight for awhile. Some people are not bothered by creosote (if this is the correct chemical in sealer)...but better to not find out..because it hurts if you are.

SCAM ALERT: People will seal your driveways with motor oil or even too watered down sealer. They look very similar going down. There is no easy way to tell the difference besides knowing what they smell like. The first rain will turn your motor oil covered driveway into a mess. We have gypsies in the area pretend to be local businesses and pull things like this, it's bad. They disappear at the end of summer and the businesses are left with people pissed off.

Roofing tar - Runnier and less thick than regular tar. It's meant to be pumped onto roofs and run down to fill in holes and places water can get in. If you use this on your driveway, you're pretty much going to end up with a huge mess for years. Because it will continually heat up in the sun and liquify again being tracked into your house over and over and over.

Regular/asphalt tar - Use this, like in the video, along curb sides and between old and new layers to help seal out water and keep the layers sticking together as you put down the new layer. You wouldn't need to tar between a base and finish layer if they were laid a day or two apart because the base layer would heat up again from the finish layer and stick. However if the base layer is older..like a couple weeks or a month. You would probably tar between them. Anything else..you tar between...concrete, old asphalt. The only exception would be sub-grade rock, however sometimes you even tar this, especially if it's in a grade critical location...where you can't have the asphalt humping up even a little. But on a typical driveway, the rock layer has enough jags and spaces that a layer of asphalt will cling to it just fine.

Crack filler - You would use this before sealing your driveway, not after. You can also use it alone to fill in gaps in your driveway and try to seal out water. So it doesn't get into the crack, freeze and blow your driveway up. The best crack filler is rubberized, so it will expand and contract. Plus it also isn't as prone to liquify again in the heat and stick to your car tires and shoes. It has to be heated up substantially to liquify, but I've seen non-rubberized begin to liquify in direct sunlight on a 95+F degree day. I try not to step on the cracks on the really hot days, as I'd rather not find out if it's going to stick to my shoes.

>> ^Stormsinger:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Stormsinger:
Looks remarkably closely related to a homemade zipline. You know, like the one that snapped and infected that poor girl with flesh-eating bacteria?
I think I'll pass...rusty metal and standing water just isn't a good combination.

We used to not care about that kinda stuff. But then again my dads friend drowned while swimming in the old quarry...so who knows who's right?

I know...my friends and I didn't either. And there aren't as many of us as there used to be. In several cases, there's a direct causal relationship in that statement, too. It's only taken us 40-50 years to realize that we are indeed mortal.


I think it's sad...I recently bought a motorcycle and upon doing my homework I discovered that most fatalities now occur because of chest and spine trauma, not head trauma because of helmets. So I asked for my birthday to get a vest full of pads over the chest and stomach and a large back plate like a turtle shell. I bought this old motorcycle because I remember my dads old motorcycle, which I rode around with him at the age of 4 with no helmet at all. It's crazy to think about.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Stormsinger:
Looks remarkably closely related to a homemade zipline. You know, like the one that snapped and infected that poor girl with flesh-eating bacteria?
I think I'll pass...rusty metal and standing water just isn't a good combination.

We used to not care about that kinda stuff. But then again my dads friend drowned while swimming in the old quarry...so who knows who's right?


I know...my friends and I didn't either. And there aren't as many of us as there used to be. In several cases, there's a direct causal relationship in that statement, too. It's only taken us 40-50 years to realize that we are indeed mortal.

>> ^Stormsinger:

Looks remarkably closely related to a homemade zipline. You know, like the one that snapped and infected that poor girl with flesh-eating bacteria?
I think I'll pass...rusty metal and standing water just isn't a good combination.


We used to not care about that kinda stuff. But then again my dads friend drowned while swimming in the old quarry...so who knows who's right?

>> ^kceaton1:

>> ^skinnydaddy1:
FAA is going to freak if they find this video and incident has not been reported. o.0

I'm right there with you, that may in fact be one hell of a major no-no and I hope they were over empty lands.
I wonder under normal regulations if they are actually even supposed to continue operating in an event like that, considering all the regulations put on flying (there are a lot). I know it looks like some guy's dumpy car just lost a side door, no biggy, but in flying they breath fire down your neck for missing certain bolts or those said bolts even being remotely loose... I'll have to look and see if a pilot can make a judgment call concerning no mandatory operation machinery attached to the craft coming off (that may be part of the main fuselage!)
I did look and see that the national statistic on flights that should have remained grounded getting fixed (some problems not so big, some big enough that when the plane landed emergency crews were needed to put out fires, not including MANY of the emergency landings at the wrong airport before the plane truly does CRASH) that number comes in at around 65000 flights over six years... This is from the FAA, so we're talking about mostly small business's up to large airlines like Delta. BUT, it must always be remembered that they do a better job than your average driver and their car by far; they just have much more "flashier" endings I guess you could say. Which makes the media frenzy about it like a feeding pool that CNN & FOX News ALIKE, engorge until nothing is left but the tasteless morsels that just reiterate everything we have been told by them before this...it is unfortunate that not only we are exposed to this media circus, but also that 'flying' is being dragged through the toxin-filled-sludge created by our media-hype-elite...
I'd figure the ONE group of people that might actually take great care of their machinery is the smaller business and solo-flyer's. I know one of my grandfather's brother spent hours on end with his plane making sure it was in tip-top shape and making sure his flight plans were exacting (he was kinda a bush-pilot, so that was important to him, if you know what I mean). A small off-topic element to this: I remember going through his flight plans and maps that went up through the Western U.S., into Western Canada, then into lower Alaska...it was amazing to see what detail he went into to get the job done; I would feel very safe flying with him if I ever did, because of the extreme measures he went to to get everything right...
I wonder if the pilot had to worry about anything when they landed, it's impossible to see from the clip, but you don't see if it goes up at all and hits the plane--but, I'd assume since everyone is acting basically happy and fine (no panic at all) I assume that the rest of that flight went normally, except for that and the large amounts of paperwork that wold follow it... (Assuming they weren't idiotic and DID report it...)


Found a little blurp about it here.

Quote
Nah it wasn't our fault. There were ten 'other' jumpers before us. Some were new and didn't know how to operate it. On takeoff they failed to close it properly and then in the back from held it down with there feet till 2500 where two of them stood up to close it properly. When they stood on it it was pushed below the stops on either side (the angle iron shaped things) and then turned the handle. I am assuming the locking pin went below the frame of the door. At height they stood to open the door - stepping on the door and turning the handle. The door didn't rise. They then stood on it harder with no change to the result. They then stood on it harder and pushed it down into the wind and it caught air and took off. One of the coolest things I have ever seen. The door landed in the quarry and has been recovered - it needs about $100 in repairs and will be back in action this weekend (or so i have been told).

Was looking for more on it but so far zip.

>> ^kymbos:

How does something like that even form?
To the geology lab!


I'm pretty sure that's a quarry and the snow is making it look more impressive through the fisheye than it really is. A true mountain would have SOMETHING growing on it. At least within eyesight.

Don't get me wrong though, he's still around 100-150ft up. A fall would -at best- hurt like a sumnabitch.

Aye, often when hunting rabbits, a dog is released to roam around the hunters. As the dog is often out of sight, it is a signal that it has the quarry in sight.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

so.. are hunting dogs supposed to yap incessantly like that?

Thanks for the thought out response MMD. Actually, my father and grandfather owned guns and kept them in the house. They were former marine and army, and definitely believed in the 2nd amendment. My father even gave me a rifle for a birthday as a child and taught me basic safety and maintenance.

But I never saw them use their guns in an emotional outburst to make some argumentative point. They had too much discipline for behavior like that. The guy in the video is clearly very angry and emotional (from the timbre in his voice) before and while using the gun.

As far as the legality of him doing what he was doing. From my experience, cops can make up a charge if they really want to, and maybe they (and child services) would at least bother the guy enough to make sure he thinks twice before brandishing a gun in this manner and putting it on youtube.

Yeah people shoot at things all the time, but a laptop? I know how they are assembled, and there are several layers of components that make up the machine, including many brittle materials that can easily shatter. Not to mention toxic materials like solder, etc. I doubt this guy has been taking laptops down to the quarry for target practice regularly enough to know how they take a hollow point.>> ^MilkmanDan:

>> ^longde:
Thinking about it more, what really bothers me about this video is the gratuitous use of the gun. To display that level of intimidation and violence in his home is one thing, but to broadcast it to other youth in his community is reckless.
One unintentional lesson that kids will take from this is that it's acceptable to wave a gun around and shoot off a few rounds to vent your anger and resolve a problem.
If I were a parent in this community, I would be making a few calls to the authorities.
And I'm the guy who supported belt whipping guy. I think gun guy is way worse than belt beating guy.
(also, how did this genius know that there would be no flying shrapnel from the components in the laptop?)

I fully understand and appreciate your concerns here, but once again I'm on the other side of the fence. Maybe just because I grew up on a farm in a rural area where a very high percentage of households owned at least one firearm and most kids in those homes were taught how to responsibly use a gun.
A lot of people think that there isn't really any justification for owning a gun outside of being a soldier or policeman, and that therefore the only way to practice being responsible with a gun is to simply never own or fire one. I would disagree, but if that is the mindset I'm not going to be able to convince anyone otherwise.
Anyway, I don't see his use of the gun as displaying any "intimidation" or "violence", so I don't have any problem with his posting the video on his daughter's facebook and/or youtube or whatever. By shooting the laptop, he wasn't telling his daughter "straighten up or next time its YOU!" (intimidation), he was telling her that actions have consequences and since the laptop is his property he can do whatever he wants with it -- including destroying it rather than have her feel like she is entitled to it.
There are plenty of freely available videos on the internet (even here on the sift, say) where people use firearms in genuinely reckless and irresponsible ways orders of magnitude beyond this one. And that is before considering ubiquitous reckless or malevolent use of firearms in fictional media like movies, etc.
If you were a parent in his community, you would be welcome to call and complain to the authorities, but they would tell you that he definitely didn't do anything against the law. So you'd pretty much be wasting your breath.
About the risk of flying shrapnel, I think that he "knows" that there wouldn't be any (or at least that the risk is acceptably minute) because he has used firearms before. Part of learning to use a gun responsibly (at least, how I would define responsibly) is shooting at things and seeing what happens to them. You shoot a BB gun at cans or bottles set up on posts. You shoot a rifle or handgun at targets at a shooting range or in a rural area with nothing in front of you. You shoot a shotgun at an empty 2-liter bottle thrown up in the air, or at clay pigeons.
While doing those things, you notice that whatever you are shooting at generally doesn't explode like it does in the movies. If any fragments fly off (not likely), they won't have much mass, they won't be traveling very fast (vastly slower than the bullet), and they will most likely be traveling in the same general direction as the bullet -- not back towards you. Physics dictates that his shooting the laptop was relatively safe, even at close range like that.

*isdupe>> ^Stingray:

dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Large-Bomb-Detonated-Under-Lake

2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

>> ^gwiz665:

Given a limited scope you can absolutely prove a negative. "There are no muslims in congress" is provable. "There is no God in the United States" is also provable.
The problem is that if you have an unlimited scope, then it becomes impossible.
"There are no fairies in my basement."
vs.
"There are no fairies."


As already pointed out, by *definition* you can't prove a negative.
As per your other threads shinyblurry, we can argue semantics all day so it's kind of pointless, but I'm going to anyway, because it's actually at the nub of the statement "you can't prove a negative".
I've also used an online dictionary you've sited in your other posts.

prove/pro͞ov/Verb
1. Demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.
2. Demonstrate by evidence or argument (someone or something) to be.

Note the use of the affirmative "the existence" / "to be". There is no scope for a negative here.

Also it's worth pointing out the etymology of the word "proof". It comes from the Latin "probare" meaning "to test". So it you've got proof of god's existence, it's got to be testable. Similarly if I want to "prove" there is no god I need to formulate a test that will give a definitive result.

Now, moving away from semantics....

So yeah, he's using a linguistic trick to try and recontextualize the statement "you can't prove a negative". That statement is generally used as a shorthand in an argument not only as a reference to the above definition, but also as a more general indication of the vast impracticality of proving a blanket negative statement such as "there is no god". In that context it is never meant as an absolute.

By adding a very restricted location, as William Lane Craig has in the video above, a negative statement of course becomes provable. I don't think any atheist would disagree that the statement "there are no coins in my pocket" could be proven simply by looking in my pocket.

For example - If as an atheist I was to say "there is no such object as the holy grail in existence" in order to prove it I would then have to trawl through every every steet, house, closet, drawer, toilet cistern, dessert, mountaintop, quarry pit, top secret inaccessible military bunker in the world, then undertake extensive excavation all the way to the earths molten core.

At his stage a believer could say "Well I have just had a personal revelation from God who spoke directly to me and told me that the grail is being kept safe underneath the icy surface of Jupiter's 6th moon Europa"

So after I've convinced NASA to undertake "The Program for the Recovery of Christs Holy Grail from Under the Surface of Jupiter's 6th Moon Europa" I'm told by the believer that they've had another personal message received directly from god that he was angry at being tested, and so has moved the grail to a divine and indestructible vault at the heart of the distant sun Omicron Beta....

However, if I make the statement - "there is no such object as the holy grail in existence in my desk drawer" - I just have to open the drawer to look and the statement can be proven.

And the above examples are with definite physical objects. Think how impossible it is to prove the statement "there is no god" when the idea of how god is defined is so widely and radically disputed depending on what religion you subscribe to, and when almost every individual within each of these religions will have their own definition of what god is.