*Do you remember when contrails were contrails, and the sky never got tic tac toe'd?*

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger


I like it derepentLEstranger. Take none of these sold-out traitors
BS. The only way to go.
These goons incessantly tow the government line on all conspiracies,
even on the most indefensibe of issues.

reply to post by pshea38


If one could at least get the phrase correct.....but, there is so much DIS- and MIS-information out there, and provided by the con-artists (and then accepted and swallowed by the gullible).....

.....Here.....the actual phrase is "Toe" the line

Read it and weep....for the death of knowledge, and the rise of ignorance........

Nobody can tell me what I am seeing now is what I saw 45 years ago laying in a field chewing on wild sweet grass.
Nobody.........Period.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder

Nobody can tell me what I am seeing now is what I saw 45 years ago laying in a field chewing on wild sweet grass.

45 years ago, the high-bypass turbofan engines did NOT exist!!

Also, 45 years ago (compared to today?).....do you have any idea how many more airplanes there are? And correspondingly more flights??

Your nostalgic trip down "Memory Lane" is irrelevant to reality today......

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by pshea38

 

If one could at least get the phrase correct.....but, there is so much DIS- and MIS-information out there, and provided by the con-artists (and then accepted and swallowed by the gullible).....

.....Here.....the actual phrase is "Toe" the line

Read it and weep....for the death of knowledge, and the rise of ignorance........

Ha! Burned mr.Bird! Tow the line is valid, and how it IS written
where I come from.

Google it, if you don't believe me.

I see your ignorance, and raise you a mouth with a foot in it. Doh!

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Iwinder

 

Nobody can tell me what I am seeing now is what I saw 45 years ago laying in a field chewing on wild sweet grass.

45 years ago, the high-bypass turbofan engines did NOT exist!!

Also, 45 years ago (compared to today?).....do you have any idea how many more airplanes there are? And correspondingly more flights??

Your nostalgic trip down "Memory Lane" is irrelevant to reality today......

So your going to go back all the way to my first year of looking at the sky?
Your forgetting the other 44 years, how about 1980? same deal for me here as the sky was blue and there where not checker boards at all......no haze no creamy screwed up skies.
"Memory Lane" can sometimes be useful in cases like this, that is why I posted my age here.
"Memory Lane" lane can be a bad thing sometimes and I think you know that,
Case in point is this little tid bit here, (not related to the thread but it shows what memories can do)
Link
whatreallyhappened.com...

Yes Memories are nasty things and should be discounted at all costs.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Er, YOU were the one that specified 45 years ago. You can hardly criticise the fact that pb's reply reflects that.

Besides, the reply was correct, the growth in traffic and the advent of HBR engines does mean that the skies are different, the spread of this engine type across all classes of airliner is relatively recent.

Pshea, first ignorance of aviation, and now English. you don't have to keep making yourself look silly, it's not compulsory.

Originally posted by Iwinder

Your forgetting the other 44 years, how about 1980? same deal for me here as the sky was blue and there where not checker boards at all......no haze no creamy screwed up skies.

1980 you say? Here's a news report from 1980 that says contrails cause 30 days more cloudiness per year, and alter the weather.

Originally posted by pshea38

Ha! Burned mr.Bird! Tow the line is valid, and how it IS written
where I come from.

Google it, if you don't believe me.

Easily done - and when you do it refers you to "toe the line", and words along the lines of ...

There is some confusion between 'toe the line' and the frequently seen misspelling 'tow the line'. The 'tow' version is no doubt encouraged by the fact that ropes or cables on ships are often called lines and that 'tow lines' are commonplace nautical items.

- www.phrases.org.uk...

or

I saw it again today, this time in a comment on an article on a political website. It referred to reporters who mindlessly "tow the administration's line."

Um, that should be "toe the line."

- grammartips.homestead.com...

I see your ignorance, and raise you a mouth with a foot in it. Doh!

You need something of value in order to be able to see or raise.

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Iwinder

 

Er, YOU were the one that specified 45 years ago. You can hardly criticise the fact that pb's reply reflects that.

Besides, the reply was correct, the growth in traffic and the advent of HBR engines does mean that the skies are different, the spread of this engine type across all classes of airliner is relatively recent.

Pshea, first ignorance of aviation, and now English. you don't have to keep making yourself look silly, it's not compulsory.

edit on 31-1-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)

I would appreciate if you left out the personal attacks and stick to the subject at hand.
Please,
Regards,Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Where did I attack you? I specifically addressed the subject at hand, as you surely saw because you quoted it.

If you refer to my remark to pshea, apart from the smiley denoting it was in fun, it also reflects the tone of that members earlier response to pb that you don't seem to have any problem with at all. C'est la vie.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Tow the line is valid

Is it not?

Is it colour or color?
Are you ignorant because you spell it color?

Even if it is technically incorrect, it is still accepted.
Same with toe and tow.

Anyway, what a BS and petty point for birdman to make!

I state categorically that I am (almost) infinitely more ignorant than knowledgeable
about all that the universe had, has, and will have to offer!

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Iwinder

 

Where did I attack you?

You seem to be having comprehension issues. Please go back and read my comment on here again. I never accused you.

Now, I answered you question, so let's get back on topic.

reply to post by pshea38


Aren't we all. And yet we will continue to take up our positions and argue our views back and forth. I don't know about you, but I like it that way

reply to post by waynos


What makes you think I read those comments? I have no idea what you're talking about.
All I know is that resorting to insulting a person during a debate is in poor form. I don't do it and I don't condone anyone lowering themselves to that method.

reply to post by Afterthought


So, are you Iwinder too?

Originally posted by pshea38
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Tow the line is valid

Is it not?

It might well be in some places - idioms change- Where was that sourced from?

Is it colour or color?
Are you ignorant because you spell it color?

I would never mis-spell it like that!

Even if it is technically incorrect, it is still accepted.
Same with toe and tow.

Except the 2 words have completely different meanings, whereas colour and color do not.

Anyway, what a BS and petty point for birdman to make!

I wouldn't have bothered with it except you used it in an attempt to insult and tar debunkers with a variation of the stupid "paid by the govt/don't think for themselves/shill" drivel. And well done for continuing with it :!!:

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Afterthought

 

So, are you Iwinder too?

Yeah, you got me. I created both profiles the same year so I could bombard the chemtrail threads in 2012.

reply to post by Afterthought


If you aren't a multi-user with different sign in names, it may be you that is the one with comprehension issues. I never said you accused me of anything, and I only ever asked you on topic questions (but in another thread, not this one as I recall)

This entire exchange has taken a quite bizarre turn, it's like something out of the twighlight zone?

Look again at your response at 12:28 and the couple of posts before it.

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Iwinder

 

Where did I attack you? I specifically addressed the subject at hand, as you surely saw because you quoted it.

If you refer to my remark to pshea, apart from the smiley denoting it was in fun, it also reflects the tone of that members earlier response to pb that you don't seem to have any problem with at all. C'est la vie.

edit on 31-1-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)

you don't have to keep making yourself look silly, it's not compulsory.

Enough said, you don't discuss you seem to prefer to attack and ridicule.
Too bad because ATS is about discussion and debate in a fair manner.
Regards, Iwinder