<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open thread 7/7</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/</link>
	<description>The Wichita Eagle Editorial Department Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:03:26 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: FilmFan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379971</link>
		<dc:creator>FilmFan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 11:15:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379971</guid>
		<description>Chas, I&#039;m trying to exude some restraint (Christian or otherwise) this fine morning.

Parkie and certain other right-to-life activists aren&#039;t all bad.  They aren&#039;t ALWAYS offensive.  The world doesn&#039;t begin and end with Big Bertha here.....But................

Between Margarine Messiah&#039;s post above - and the bombast and overweening arrogance that befouled the Pharmacy blog, there&#039;s steam comin&#039; out me pores.  

But I&#039;m tryin&#039; to be good.....I really and truly am.....

&#039;Cause when I&#039;m bad.....I&#039;m oh, so bad......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chas, I&#8217;m trying to exude some restraint (Christian or otherwise) this fine morning.</p>
<p>Parkie and certain other right-to-life activists aren&#8217;t all bad.  They aren&#8217;t ALWAYS offensive.  The world doesn&#8217;t begin and end with Big Bertha here&#8230;..But&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
<p>Between Margarine Messiah&#8217;s post above &#8211; and the bombast and overweening arrogance that befouled the Pharmacy blog, there&#8217;s steam comin&#8217; out me pores.  </p>
<p>But I&#8217;m tryin&#8217; to be good&#8230;..I really and truly am&#8230;..</p>
<p>&#8216;Cause when I&#8217;m bad&#8230;..I&#8217;m oh, so bad&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379967</link>
		<dc:creator>Chas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 11:10:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379967</guid>
		<description>Gosh,  Film Fan,   your  posts  are  most  interesting  even  when you&#039;re  flaming  mad!!   You  keep it  up,  girl!!   Love your  style!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gosh,  Film Fan,   your  posts  are  most  interesting  even  when you&#8217;re  flaming  mad!!   You  keep it  up,  girl!!   Love your  style!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FilmFan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379965</link>
		<dc:creator>FilmFan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 11:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379965</guid>
		<description>Oh, I see....

So, women who commit abortions have no human decency.  

My ex was plethorically promiscuous before January 1973; yet somehow, some way, Roe V. Wade is solely responsible for his moral delinquencies.  Are those Supremes responsible for the nearly-34-old child, now residing in Indiana, for whom this pig has taken no responsibility, financially or otherwise?  

Okay, just what in the #$%% WAS I back in 1975?  I THINK I was human; I certainly didn&#039;t look bovine at 6 feet and 120 pounds.  

Gee thanks, Parkay.  

You&#039;re a real prince.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I see&#8230;.</p>
<p>So, women who commit abortions have no human decency.  </p>
<p>My ex was plethorically promiscuous before January 1973; yet somehow, some way, Roe V. Wade is solely responsible for his moral delinquencies.  Are those Supremes responsible for the nearly-34-old child, now residing in Indiana, for whom this pig has taken no responsibility, financially or otherwise?  </p>
<p>Okay, just what in the #$%% WAS I back in 1975?  I THINK I was human; I certainly didn&#8217;t look bovine at 6 feet and 120 pounds.  </p>
<p>Gee thanks, Parkay.  </p>
<p>You&#8217;re a real prince.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379943</link>
		<dc:creator>Chas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:02:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379943</guid>
		<description>A  long  Monday....  So....

Good night; good luck; God bless —
Whatever you conceive God to be!!

Blessings ALL!!

So mote it be!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A  long  Monday&#8230;.  So&#8230;.</p>
<p>Good night; good luck; God bless —<br />
Whatever you conceive God to be!!</p>
<p>Blessings ALL!!</p>
<p>So mote it be!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379942</link>
		<dc:creator>Chas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379942</guid>
		<description>This is  a  most  interesting  site  --  :-)

http://www.chasclifton.com/blogger.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is  a  most  interesting  site  &#8212;  :-)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.chasclifton.com/blogger.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.chasclifton.com/blogger.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Monkeyhawk</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379939</link>
		<dc:creator>Monkeyhawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 06:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379939</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;Mr. Limbaugh, please dispel the ugly pedophilia rumors once &amp; for all.&lt;/b&gt;
	
&lt;i&gt;As you know Mr. Limbaugh, there are several liberal wacko websites that have nothing better to do than spread ugly rumors about you. I know that no one is perfect, I too once had problems with pain medications, and I&#039;ve had a few skeletons in my closet, just like you do, but please, address these ugly rumors that you go to the Dominican Republic and elsewhere to go on &#039;child sex&#039; tours, and that you were stopped coming back to the U.S. with a suitcase full of viagra.

I feel that if you simply address the ugly smear campaign leveled at you by the liberals, it will stop immediately, once the truth is finally told and the lies challenged.

The internet is a wonderful tool for spreading the message of compassionate conservatism and safety from terrorism, but the awful liberals are using it to spread lies and propaganda, so please, don&#039;t let them get away with it Mr. Limbaugh, look them straight in the face and tell them in no uncertain terms, &#039;I ABSOLUTELY DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THOSE CHILDREN&#039;, and I&#039;m sure the ugly rumor mill will shut down, and we can concentrate on conquering the world for the God fearing republicans.

Please Rush, only YOU can stop these nasty lies and smears, only YOU can put the liberal liars in their places, so do it, and do it quick, cause irreparable harm is being done to your stellar reputation.

Just say it Rush, just say it, &quot;I did NOT have sex with those children&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Mr. Limbaugh, please dispel the ugly pedophilia rumors once &amp; for all.</b></p>
<p><i>As you know Mr. Limbaugh, there are several liberal wacko websites that have nothing better to do than spread ugly rumors about you. I know that no one is perfect, I too once had problems with pain medications, and I&#8217;ve had a few skeletons in my closet, just like you do, but please, address these ugly rumors that you go to the Dominican Republic and elsewhere to go on &#8216;child sex&#8217; tours, and that you were stopped coming back to the U.S. with a suitcase full of viagra.</p>
<p>I feel that if you simply address the ugly smear campaign leveled at you by the liberals, it will stop immediately, once the truth is finally told and the lies challenged.</p>
<p>The internet is a wonderful tool for spreading the message of compassionate conservatism and safety from terrorism, but the awful liberals are using it to spread lies and propaganda, so please, don&#8217;t let them get away with it Mr. Limbaugh, look them straight in the face and tell them in no uncertain terms, &#8216;I ABSOLUTELY DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THOSE CHILDREN&#8217;, and I&#8217;m sure the ugly rumor mill will shut down, and we can concentrate on conquering the world for the God fearing republicans.</p>
<p>Please Rush, only YOU can stop these nasty lies and smears, only YOU can put the liberal liars in their places, so do it, and do it quick, cause irreparable harm is being done to your stellar reputation.</p>
<p>Just say it Rush, just say it, &#8220;I did NOT have sex with those children&#8221;</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Predestined</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379938</link>
		<dc:creator>Predestined</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 06:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379938</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Regular and Nathan.  I appreciate you both answering.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Regular and Nathan.  I appreciate you both answering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathaniel</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379888</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathaniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 05:02:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379888</guid>
		<description>Predestined,

&quot;What is the average or typical enlistement time for the Marines? (U.S. Marine Corp)&quot;

It is 8 years for the initial enlistment contract for all branches.  Most often that is 4 years active and 4 years in the IRR.  In a more technical MOS where school can be a year long, the time active would be 5 years and 3 inactive.

For reserves it is 6 in the SMCR and 2 in the IRR.

&quot;Does that time include boot camp/basic training?&quot;

That time starts the moment you sign your contract.  The day you set foot at boot camp is the day your active time starts.  The day you sign your contract your IRR time starts.

So if you sign your contract and don&#039;t go to boot camp for X amount of time, then X will be subtracted from your IRR time after your active service.

&quot;Is boot camp/basic training 13 weeks?&quot;

For the Marines yes.  Then you have 2-3 weeks of Marine Combat Training after that.  Then you have your MOS school.

&quot;Would the above information have been the same 20 years ago?&quot;

To my knowledge, yes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Predestined,</p>
<p>&#8220;What is the average or typical enlistement time for the Marines? (U.S. Marine Corp)&#8221;</p>
<p>It is 8 years for the initial enlistment contract for all branches.  Most often that is 4 years active and 4 years in the IRR.  In a more technical MOS where school can be a year long, the time active would be 5 years and 3 inactive.</p>
<p>For reserves it is 6 in the SMCR and 2 in the IRR.</p>
<p>&#8220;Does that time include boot camp/basic training?&#8221;</p>
<p>That time starts the moment you sign your contract.  The day you set foot at boot camp is the day your active time starts.  The day you sign your contract your IRR time starts.</p>
<p>So if you sign your contract and don&#8217;t go to boot camp for X amount of time, then X will be subtracted from your IRR time after your active service.</p>
<p>&#8220;Is boot camp/basic training 13 weeks?&#8221;</p>
<p>For the Marines yes.  Then you have 2-3 weeks of Marine Combat Training after that.  Then you have your MOS school.</p>
<p>&#8220;Would the above information have been the same 20 years ago?&#8221;</p>
<p>To my knowledge, yes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Monkeyhawk</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379880</link>
		<dc:creator>Monkeyhawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 04:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379880</guid>
		<description>Check this out from Wonkette!

Thomas Jefferson invented July 4, by writing the Declaration of Independence for “Independence Day,” and later writing the Constitution, and then patriotically dropping dead on July 4. This is why George W. Bush went to Jefferson’s famous slave brothel, Monticello, to read a July 4 speech that quoted Jefferson except for the part of the quote where Jefferson said Christians were idiots.

Here’s what Bush tried to read while everybody heckled him:

    &lt;i&gt;On the 50th anniversary of America’s independence, Thomas Jefferson passed away. But before leaving this world, he explained that the principles of the Declaration of Independence were universal. In one of the final letters of his life, he wrote, “May it be to the world, what I believe it will be — to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all — the Signal of arousing men to burst the chains, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.”&lt;/i&gt;

Shrub left out the best part!
The actual letter says this:

    &lt;i&gt;May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains &lt;b&gt;under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves&lt;/b&gt;, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.&lt;/i?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Check this out from Wonkette!</p>
<p>Thomas Jefferson invented July 4, by writing the Declaration of Independence for “Independence Day,” and later writing the Constitution, and then patriotically dropping dead on July 4. This is why George W. Bush went to Jefferson’s famous slave brothel, Monticello, to read a July 4 speech that quoted Jefferson except for the part of the quote where Jefferson said Christians were idiots.</p>
<p>Here’s what Bush tried to read while everybody heckled him:</p>
<p>    <i>On the 50th anniversary of America’s independence, Thomas Jefferson passed away. But before leaving this world, he explained that the principles of the Declaration of Independence were universal. In one of the final letters of his life, he wrote, “May it be to the world, what I believe it will be — to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all — the Signal of arousing men to burst the chains, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.”</i></p>
<p>Shrub left out the best part!<br />
The actual letter says this:</p>
<p>    <i>May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains <b>under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves</b>, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.&lt;/i?</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Regular</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379805</link>
		<dc:creator>Regular</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:49:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379805</guid>
		<description>#
Predestined
Posted July 7, 2008 at 9:21 pm &#124; Permalink

If Nathan is around, I need some Marine info. If he isn’t, anyone who is familiar can answer.

What is the average or typical enlistement time for the Marines? (U.S. Marine Corp)

Does that time include boot camp/basic training?

Is boot camp/basic training 13 weeks?

Would the above information have been the same 20 years ago?

TIA I couldn’t find the answers I needed online and calling a recruiter might result in getting me signed up. :O
----------------------
13 weeks sounds about right.

Back in the Nam days, I think they were pushing cannon fodder through at 9 weeks.  Not sure about 20 years ago.

I think enlistment time is dependent on your career field as an enlisted.  The more technical it is (the longer the tech school) the longer the enlistment is.  Some schools that are highly technical, can be 18 to 24 months long with lots of post tech school training.  (NUKIES in Navy have long tech schools)

Used to be 3 year enlistment for Marines, I think and 2 years, back in the Nam era.

Could be wrong, memory is fuzzy and decades have passed. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#<br />
Predestined<br />
Posted July 7, 2008 at 9:21 pm | Permalink</p>
<p>If Nathan is around, I need some Marine info. If he isn’t, anyone who is familiar can answer.</p>
<p>What is the average or typical enlistement time for the Marines? (U.S. Marine Corp)</p>
<p>Does that time include boot camp/basic training?</p>
<p>Is boot camp/basic training 13 weeks?</p>
<p>Would the above information have been the same 20 years ago?</p>
<p>TIA I couldn’t find the answers I needed online and calling a recruiter might result in getting me signed up. :O<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br />
13 weeks sounds about right.</p>
<p>Back in the Nam days, I think they were pushing cannon fodder through at 9 weeks.  Not sure about 20 years ago.</p>
<p>I think enlistment time is dependent on your career field as an enlisted.  The more technical it is (the longer the tech school) the longer the enlistment is.  Some schools that are highly technical, can be 18 to 24 months long with lots of post tech school training.  (NUKIES in Navy have long tech schools)</p>
<p>Used to be 3 year enlistment for Marines, I think and 2 years, back in the Nam era.</p>
<p>Could be wrong, memory is fuzzy and decades have passed. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KansasNative</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379798</link>
		<dc:creator>KansasNative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:36:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379798</guid>
		<description>I see HLP is still desperately trying to prove something he doesn&#039;t believe in is not something that&#039;s real.

HLP is a wacky nutcase.

I wonder if he&#039;s managed to find someone to kill with his concealed weapon.

Good luck HLP, perhaps tomorrow you&#039;ll get lucky!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see HLP is still desperately trying to prove something he doesn&#8217;t believe in is not something that&#8217;s real.</p>
<p>HLP is a wacky nutcase.</p>
<p>I wonder if he&#8217;s managed to find someone to kill with his concealed weapon.</p>
<p>Good luck HLP, perhaps tomorrow you&#8217;ll get lucky!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Predestined</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379788</link>
		<dc:creator>Predestined</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379788</guid>
		<description>If Nathan is around, I need some Marine info.  If he isn&#039;t, anyone who is familiar can answer.

What is the average or typical enlistement time for the Marines?  (U.S. Marine Corp)

Does that time include boot camp/basic training?

Is boot camp/basic training 13 weeks?

Would the above information have been the same 20 years ago?

TIA  I couldn&#039;t find the answers I needed online and calling a recruiter might result in getting me signed up. :O</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Nathan is around, I need some Marine info.  If he isn&#8217;t, anyone who is familiar can answer.</p>
<p>What is the average or typical enlistement time for the Marines?  (U.S. Marine Corp)</p>
<p>Does that time include boot camp/basic training?</p>
<p>Is boot camp/basic training 13 weeks?</p>
<p>Would the above information have been the same 20 years ago?</p>
<p>TIA  I couldn&#8217;t find the answers I needed online and calling a recruiter might result in getting me signed up. :O</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lindainks55</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379776</link>
		<dc:creator>lindainks55</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379776</guid>
		<description>We can all stop speculating on one potential VP choice.
-----------

Breaking news: Now, Jim Webb takes himself off Obama&#039;s VP list

Jim Webb, the Virginia senator and former Republican who packs his own heat most places, has withdrawn himself from consideration as Barack Obama&#039;s Democratic vice presidential running mate.

In a statement released moments ago, Webb said: &quot;Last week I communicated to Senator Obama and his presidential campaign my firm intention to remain in the United States Senate, where I believe I am best equipped to serve the people of Virginia and this country.&quot;

&quot;Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for Vice President.&quot;

Webb also promised to campaign hard for the Democratic presidential ticket this fall.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/07/jim-webb.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We can all stop speculating on one potential VP choice.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;</p>
<p>Breaking news: Now, Jim Webb takes himself off Obama&#8217;s VP list</p>
<p>Jim Webb, the Virginia senator and former Republican who packs his own heat most places, has withdrawn himself from consideration as Barack Obama&#8217;s Democratic vice presidential running mate.</p>
<p>In a statement released moments ago, Webb said: &#8220;Last week I communicated to Senator Obama and his presidential campaign my firm intention to remain in the United States Senate, where I believe I am best equipped to serve the people of Virginia and this country.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for Vice President.&#8221;</p>
<p>Webb also promised to campaign hard for the Democratic presidential ticket this fall.</p>
<p><a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/07/jim-webb.html" rel="nofollow">http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/07/jim-webb.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Regular</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379774</link>
		<dc:creator>Regular</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:54:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379774</guid>
		<description>#
beber
Posted July 7, 2008 at 8:17 pm &#124; Permalink

More than likely, whatever the statement meant, it has nothing to do whatsoever with atmospheric pressure anyway. However no matter how you slice it, a measurement with out volume can not contain anything.
------------------------------
Here you go, put in 32 for PSI, which is standard tire pressure for a lot of American car tires and see the results expressed in different units. :)

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-pressureunits.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#<br />
beber<br />
Posted July 7, 2008 at 8:17 pm | Permalink</p>
<p>More than likely, whatever the statement meant, it has nothing to do whatsoever with atmospheric pressure anyway. However no matter how you slice it, a measurement with out volume can not contain anything.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
Here you go, put in 32 for PSI, which is standard tire pressure for a lot of American car tires and see the results expressed in different units. :)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-pressureunits.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-pressureunits.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: writerdog</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379770</link>
		<dc:creator>writerdog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379770</guid>
		<description>Scared to death by damn proud of him, jumped from 1250 feet. I use to work at an air port and know that that is not that high!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scared to death by damn proud of him, jumped from 1250 feet. I use to work at an air port and know that that is not that high!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lindainks55</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379767</link>
		<dc:creator>lindainks55</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:27:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379767</guid>
		<description>Thanks for sharing, dog!  You sound happy and rightfully proud when you&#039;ve just heard from him.  ;-)  It does sound like the nut didn&#039;t fall too far from the tree and I know how strong and stable that tree is!  Thinking the best of thoughts -- for ALL of you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for sharing, dog!  You sound happy and rightfully proud when you&#8217;ve just heard from him.  ;-)  It does sound like the nut didn&#8217;t fall too far from the tree and I know how strong and stable that tree is!  Thinking the best of thoughts &#8212; for ALL of you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: writerdog</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379765</link>
		<dc:creator>writerdog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:22:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379765</guid>
		<description>Just got the word on how it went, but the youngest said he would make his first jump today. And training is boring and he is sore. Somehow the thought of airborne being boring is odd to me.  He said his first landing was soft but the second one he landed hard.

I told him the sign of insanity is jumping out of a perfectly good air Plane! My son the airborne!
Two more jumps tomorrow and then Wednesday a night jump, funny the boy did not seem  insane but then he is my son it may have rubbed off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just got the word on how it went, but the youngest said he would make his first jump today. And training is boring and he is sore. Somehow the thought of airborne being boring is odd to me.  He said his first landing was soft but the second one he landed hard.</p>
<p>I told him the sign of insanity is jumping out of a perfectly good air Plane! My son the airborne!<br />
Two more jumps tomorrow and then Wednesday a night jump, funny the boy did not seem  insane but then he is my son it may have rubbed off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beber</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379762</link>
		<dc:creator>beber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379762</guid>
		<description>More than likely, whatever the statement meant, it has nothing to do whatsoever with atmospheric pressure anyway. However no matter how you slice it, a measurement with out volume can not contain anything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More than likely, whatever the statement meant, it has nothing to do whatsoever with atmospheric pressure anyway. However no matter how you slice it, a measurement with out volume can not contain anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beber</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379761</link>
		<dc:creator>beber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:08:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379761</guid>
		<description>&quot;Are you claiming that a 1 meter square vertical column, extending from Earth’s surface thru the atmosphere, is not a “volume”?&quot; -- cosmos

Of course not. I said so basically in my first post. I know what you are getting at. That in a column of air one meter square through the atmosphere an increase in pressure of .42 kg = an increase in content of .42 kg of water in the entire column.

However: from the Wikipedia: 
&quot;At the same temperature, a column of dry air will be denser or heavier than a column of air containing any water vapor&quot;

Thus the more water there is in the air, the less atmospheric pressure. Can you see now that something has to be mis-stated in your quotation. An increase in pressure (kg per meter square) means a decrease in actual water in the air. (grams per cubic meter)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Are you claiming that a 1 meter square vertical column, extending from Earth’s surface thru the atmosphere, is not a “volume”?&#8221; &#8212; cosmos</p>
<p>Of course not. I said so basically in my first post. I know what you are getting at. That in a column of air one meter square through the atmosphere an increase in pressure of .42 kg = an increase in content of .42 kg of water in the entire column.</p>
<p>However: from the Wikipedia:<br />
&#8220;At the same temperature, a column of dry air will be denser or heavier than a column of air containing any water vapor&#8221;</p>
<p>Thus the more water there is in the air, the less atmospheric pressure. Can you see now that something has to be mis-stated in your quotation. An increase in pressure (kg per meter square) means a decrease in actual water in the air. (grams per cubic meter)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cosmos_originally</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379729</link>
		<dc:creator>cosmos_originally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:59:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379729</guid>
		<description>beber,

Are you claiming that a 1 meter square vertical column, extending from Earth&#039;s surface thru the atmosphere, is &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; a &quot;volume&quot;?

If so, please tell me what it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>beber,</p>
<p>Are you claiming that a 1 meter square vertical column, extending from Earth&#8217;s surface thru the atmosphere, is <i>not</i> a &#8220;volume&#8221;?</p>
<p>If so, please tell me what it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379728</link>
		<dc:creator>Chas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:51:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379728</guid>
		<description>&quot;Google it and look for atmospheric dynamics above each of the regions you mentioned. You will find they differ greatly.&quot;   [Regular]

Not gonna  Google it,  dumbkopf...  YOU  made  the  claim...  YOU   prove it!!   I   am not  playing your  silly  game  anymore...   You  dont  run  this  Blog,  and  I  am  fed up  with your  lousy  attempts  to  constantly  disrupt  even  the  simplest of  conversations...   So,    go  fly  a  kite!!   (in a thuderstorm)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Google it and look for atmospheric dynamics above each of the regions you mentioned. You will find they differ greatly.&#8221;   [Regular]</p>
<p>Not gonna  Google it,  dumbkopf&#8230;  YOU  made  the  claim&#8230;  YOU   prove it!!   I   am not  playing your  silly  game  anymore&#8230;   You  dont  run  this  Blog,  and  I  am  fed up  with your  lousy  attempts  to  constantly  disrupt  even  the  simplest of  conversations&#8230;   So,    go  fly  a  kite!!   (in a thuderstorm)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Regular</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379725</link>
		<dc:creator>Regular</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:42:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379725</guid>
		<description>Actually, a bike tire typically utilizes more pressure (in psi) than a car tire. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, a bike tire typically utilizes more pressure (in psi) than a car tire. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beber</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379724</link>
		<dc:creator>beber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:39:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379724</guid>
		<description>No it&#039;s not; it&#039;s the pressure exerted against the inner surface of the tire; it has nothing to do with the mass of air inside the tire. If it did, a lawnmower tire would have as much air in it as a tractor tire, given the same pressure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No it&#8217;s not; it&#8217;s the pressure exerted against the inner surface of the tire; it has nothing to do with the mass of air inside the tire. If it did, a lawnmower tire would have as much air in it as a tractor tire, given the same pressure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Regular</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379716</link>
		<dc:creator>Regular</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:17:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379716</guid>
		<description>#
beber
Posted July 7, 2008 at 6:07 pm &#124; Permalink

You’re confusing pressure with content, Regular.
Cosmos, you have no idea what you are talking about.

“Absolute humidity is the quantity of water in a particular volume of air” — Wikipedia

“Absolute humidity ranges from 0 gram per cubic meter in dry air to 30 grams per cubic meter (0.03 ounce per cubic foot) when the vapour is saturated at 30 °C.

Note Regular, “grams per cubic meter.”

A statement that something contains an additional.42 kg per square meter is nonsense. Without volume you can’t have mass or content. A statement that something has an additional pressure of .42 kg per square meter is correct.
-----------------------
Then pounds per square inch when inflating a tire is nonsense. :)

I don&#039;t think I&#039;m the one confused here beber.

I was also on an 8PSI Study funded by NASA which took place in an altitude chamber.  It was the pressure experimented with to determine what PSI the &#039;space suits&#039; that the shuttle mission specialists would be wearing while in space.

But NASA is probably wrong too when it refers to atmospheric pressure eh beber? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#<br />
beber<br />
Posted July 7, 2008 at 6:07 pm | Permalink</p>
<p>You’re confusing pressure with content, Regular.<br />
Cosmos, you have no idea what you are talking about.</p>
<p>“Absolute humidity is the quantity of water in a particular volume of air” — Wikipedia</p>
<p>“Absolute humidity ranges from 0 gram per cubic meter in dry air to 30 grams per cubic meter (0.03 ounce per cubic foot) when the vapour is saturated at 30 °C.</p>
<p>Note Regular, “grams per cubic meter.”</p>
<p>A statement that something contains an additional.42 kg per square meter is nonsense. Without volume you can’t have mass or content. A statement that something has an additional pressure of .42 kg per square meter is correct.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br />
Then pounds per square inch when inflating a tire is nonsense. :)</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;m the one confused here beber.</p>
<p>I was also on an 8PSI Study funded by NASA which took place in an altitude chamber.  It was the pressure experimented with to determine what PSI the &#8217;space suits&#8217; that the shuttle mission specialists would be wearing while in space.</p>
<p>But NASA is probably wrong too when it refers to atmospheric pressure eh beber? :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beber</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379714</link>
		<dc:creator>beber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-77/#comment-379714</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re confusing pressure with content, Regular.
Cosmos, you have no idea what you are talking about.

&quot;Absolute humidity is the quantity of water in a particular volume of air&quot; -- Wikipedia

&quot;Absolute humidity ranges from 0 gram per cubic meter in dry air to 30 grams per cubic meter (0.03 ounce per cubic foot) when the vapour is saturated at 30 °C.

Note Regular, &quot;grams per cubic meter.&quot; 

A statement that something contains an additional.42 kg per square meter is nonsense. Without volume you can&#039;t have mass or content. A statement that something has an additional pressure of .42 kg per square meter is correct.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re confusing pressure with content, Regular.<br />
Cosmos, you have no idea what you are talking about.</p>
<p>&#8220;Absolute humidity is the quantity of water in a particular volume of air&#8221; &#8212; Wikipedia</p>
<p>&#8220;Absolute humidity ranges from 0 gram per cubic meter in dry air to 30 grams per cubic meter (0.03 ounce per cubic foot) when the vapour is saturated at 30 °C.</p>
<p>Note Regular, &#8220;grams per cubic meter.&#8221; </p>
<p>A statement that something contains an additional.42 kg per square meter is nonsense. Without volume you can&#8217;t have mass or content. A statement that something has an additional pressure of .42 kg per square meter is correct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
