Motorcycle Forums banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
I am with Sachi 100% on this one, and you folks that pay attention know THAT doesn't happen every day. The 'First' thing is really f&cking annoying me. This isn't 'First' grade. If you don't have anything to say but 'First' you can stick the words of B-Rad where the sun don't shine, and that is exactly where your 'First' post is going to go too. I'm really not into moderating anyone, but this 'First' crap is going to be the 'First' thing I moderate here, and that will be the 'First' thing the next clown that does it can count on, so just cut it before I do.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
Guys, this was a really great test and writeup, and it was certainly easy to understand who the winner would be, but how important is it that these bikes are winners on the racetrack? I know that the Honda is really 'user friendly', but since these bikes are essentially race bikes, wouldn't the one that circles the racetrack the quickest be more inclined to be the winner? Maybe that would be the Honda anyway, but having a local hotshoe run each one on the track would tell me more about which is best for what these bikes were really designed for anyway. I guess this was more of an all-around street oriented shootout, but that track is where these bikes should live. I'm not questioning the result, just the criteria. Still a really good test.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
They Hayabusa is aerodynamically correct, yet everyone calls that bike ugly. Style is part of every bike including a V-Strom, because if you ride one of those it proves you have no sense of style.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
You guys can agree all you want, but that 'First' crap has seen its last day here. A free exchange of ideas, even if you don't agree with what is said, is different from the 'First' nonsense, and ideas and discussion, and yes, even arguments about all types of things are what the site is all about. What it isn't about is a contest to see who can post 'First' the fastest. It was funny for about 2 1/2 seconds here, and now it is just childish. I don't think it's all that tough on people not to do it. If any of you can't see the difference between an off-topic discussion and a juvenile spam post, then I can't really help you out.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
Airhawk, you and Seruzawa are both full of it. Just get your tanning lotion and wading boots on for the onslaught. Too bad the Main Cop on the Global Warming stage is using 10 times the fossil fuel in a month than I do in a year. I guess even he doesn't believe his own bullshyt.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
"The problem for them is, to accept Global Warming would mean accepting the idea that what they're doing now might have to change."

Ya think Algore is gonna change? It doesn't seem to worry him a bit. Kind of like some doctor telling me red meat is horrible for your health and not to eat it while he is munching on a steak. If this is such a complete science, why were many of the same scientists insisting we were headed for a new ice age in the 80's. Was that all correct science too? Weather is hardly an exact science to begin with, so to tell me there is an absolute one thing that is making a climate change is junk science at best. Read that chaotic systems are not predictable link and maybe you will actually admit that AL may be mistaken.

Debunking Modern Climate Myths

Climate myths: Chaotic systems are not predictable - climate-change - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment

Climate change: A guide for the perplexed - earth - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment

NCPA - BA #230 - Myths of Global Warming

Science FAQs | cooler heads

So I know I'm an idiot too for not swallowing the ALGORE version hook, line and sinker. Everyone that doesn't buy into it is an idiot right? Nothing wrong with conservation and less pollution. Let's cut out the crap though.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
Well, I read what he said, didn't attack him personally, posted rebuttals to every point, and never talked about how hot Mars is. I responded to him, and you in a rational way. Not good enough? You and him act as if there are no competing theories out there. Well there are people who have different 'theories', and they are from people that are competent and intelligent as anyone you can name. The 'others' discounted him just as you discount any theory other than your own. Pretty funny that the people that are supposed to be tolerant of other ideas so quickly swipe them away as if they didn't exist, and then brand those that don't march to the tune 'stupid'. You are correct about one thing. You shouldn't go down that road again. Your mind was closed long ago on this issue. Only time will prove what junk science climate predictions really are.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
You are wrong because the very people you cite can't agree on a correct climate model. It is not an exact science, so please quit professing such. If it was then there would be then everyone would come to the EXACT same conclusion, just as everyone knows 2 + 2 = 4. There is no argument with that simple math, yet you seem to act as if there is no argument in climate modeling. Even the most knowledgeable climate scientists would admit there are many different possiblities, variables, and analysis. All have come up with different predictions for the future. How is that possible with an exact science? It isn't possible. There is argument. There are competing theories.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top