Balta1701

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 12:39 PM) I agree, but who would you say are the other two? Well, that's a bit of an odd question IMO, because what do you do in placed like LAA for example, where you have a guy in the dugout who may in many cases actually call some of the pitches? Or in places where some pitchers shake off a lot of pitches and call some of their own games? If I had to come up with another one, I'd say IRod may be up on that list - the Marlins were certainly a lot better throwing to him than without him.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 12:24 PM) It was a joke. The "supposed" worst team in the AFC beat the best team in the NFC. I'm sorry that you're still too busy crying about the officiating to laugh. So wait, the Texans beat the Seahawks?

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 11:40 AM) While I agree we have too much creationist thinking in the current ID society that does not change the fact that the base question of ID asks a simple question: Which is more probable? A random generator function at the heart of ENS or an intelligent optimizer complete with garbage collection? Prior to DNA testing & genetic science in general the bulk of the geological evidence supported the random generator function. Now it's not completely random because it does have survival instincts serving as part of it's domain, but it's still a random function to produce it's range of mutation. Well at least that's the theory. But recent geological evidence when put under the scrutiny of DNA testing & genetic science in general is weakening that idea. Juggs...please, I'm going to chime in on the recent discussion here...WHAT EVIDENCE? The last time we had one of these discussions, I got you to admit your source on how humanity was a "special species" or whatever it was your term was...you pointed to a guy at U of Chicago who's work actually was in direct contradiction with your claim. You claimed his work showed that in human evolution, somehow mutation rates were much faster than in most species and thus humanity showed design through that difference, and this was in fact the opposite of what his papers said. His papers said that random mutation proceded at basically the same rate in human evolution as in most other equally complex species, but that there was a very strong selective pressure towards higher cognitive functions - meaning new genes were not appearing at any sort of accelerated rate, but when they did appear, if beneficial in certain ways, they were adopted very rapidly due to a vastly increased chance of survival. Basically, exactly what Evolution by Natural Selection would predict if there was a strong pressure towards a trait. This was in stark contrast with what you were claiming the writer's worko actually said. Now, you refer to "recent geological evidence when put under the scrutiny of DNA testing & genetic science". I actually am a geologist. I know a fair bit about geobiology. I've been to talks, read papers, and know some pretty damn good geobiologists. Several are on this floor with me. None of them to my knowledge know of any of this evidence that somewhere out there evidence has been provided which suggests against the random generation of mutation as the cause of variation. None of my readings, knowledge, or lectures have proven that either. So, it's time for you to tell us what your sources for this claim are. Specific papers which back up your conclusions. It is totally impossible to evaluate any of your claims without citations, so please provide some.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 11:08 AM) I still can't see what all the fuss is about! I really wish the real facts would come out, damned or be damned. The ONLY way you're going to get that right now seems to be a special prosecutor. Gonzalez is not going to tell the truth and the white house is not going to hand over documents if the Republicans won't make them testify under oath with the threat of perjury charges and subpoena power over documents. They've proven for 3 years, and they're proving again today, that they're more interested in protecting the White House than almost anything else, because if they lose the White House, they lose the ability to slide in all of their little pet projects and so forth.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 10:16 AM) I give the media credit, I have heard the words "horrible officiating" and "fix" A LOT more than I thought I would today. That game was VERY suspecious and I'm glad people are talking about it. I'm still against the idea of a "fix", but I think it's very hard to deny horrible officiating when some 90 million Americans are watching.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 09:46 AM) Yeah, but think about it. What does it say when the six seed in one conference beats the one seed in the other? We all know that the AFC is a whole lot tougher than the NFC, and this just seems like another way of showing it. It says that the AFC was the one bribing the refs?

ESPN is supposedly flipping their front page to feature the bad officiating by the bottom of the hour.

Well, the Republicans here will be happy to know that despite the fact that Specter says he thinks the program was illegal and the fact that he's holding those hearings, he's already doing everything he can to make sure nothing actually happens because of them. He's first of all prevented the Attorney General from having to testify under oath, the obvious reprocussion of which is that if he chooses to lie to the committee, there's not a damn thing they can do about it, and he's also preventing video of previous statements by the President and AG from being shown (they have the transcripts, but video always works vastly better in a TV world as you know.)

I won't rule it out as possible like I will with the Royals, and anything can happen - Bonderman and Rogers could suddenly turn into the best 1-2 pitching combo in baseball, and Ordonez could stay healthy for a full season and show no signs of previous injuries, and Ivan Rodriguez could suddenly regain those 30 pounds he lost coming into last year, and Percival and Todd Jones could suddenly both have amazing and healthy seasons, and all their young guys could play above their heads, etc. It will take a lot going right for the Twins to be able to challenge for that division. It would take even more going right for the Tigers to do so. Never rule anything out in baseball...but it's just not something I'd call likely.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 07:09 AM) There truly is nothing like comparing the stats of injury-shortened seasons. Or from a guy who only spent 34 at bats in the big leagues, against some dang good pitching too.

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 07:38 PM) I think it looks fine but i wouldn't doubt that he grows his old hair back during the season. Crede, BA, and Cotts could compete to see who ends up the season looking the most like Jesus.

QUOTE(juddling @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 07:22 AM) Personally...i think that if Muslims want to EVER be taken seriously by the rest of the world, they need to get a thicker skin and not resort to violence at EVERY percieved slight. Taken seriously? In what way? It sure looks like we have to take 1/5 of the world's population seriously to my eyes. Especially if we like that 4 wheel drive.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 07:38 AM) I wear my bleeding heart on my sleeve. Thank you very much. Dude, you should really get that looked at. I take it Bush's health care system hasn't been to kind to you.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 07:43 AM) I don't understand, does that mean I'll have to pay for my Yahoo! accounts? Or are they giving businesses a chance to pay for an EZpass through the spam filter? The way I understood it when these sorts of plans were first proposed was that overall you really wouldn't wind up paying for anything. The ISP's will wind up handling it. What should happen is that each ISP in the business will start charging $.25 or so for each email it receives, if that email is sent by a reputable sender. Once you get a certain amount of people on an ISP, you'll wind up probably almost averaging out in terms of cost. Some small, local ISP will probably send roughly the same number of legit emails to AOL as AOL will send to that ISP, so the cost to each one should be a wash. However, if an ISP is hosting a spammer...the 15 million or so emails that spammer will send out will all of a sudden provide that ISP with a $3.75 million bill, at which point the ISP will either have to shut the guy down or pay up. The idea behind this is to make it so expensive for spammers to conduct business that they'll just disappear. It's good in theory. We'll see if it works in practice. I hope it does.

I haven't a clue which team would have won had the refs actually done their jobs. I haven't a clue which was the better team. Poor.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:32 PM) I never thought I would get so worked up over a team that isn't even in my top 5 favorite teams in the league. On that I'll agree with. Guess that's what the Super Bowl does. I just wanted to see a good game and actually see which team was the better team, and I didn't get that at all.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:24 PM) Yeah, that's with the outrage. Michelle Tafoya I believe it was went up to interview Holmgren as he was arguing with the reg to do the interview they do before the half(to ask about adjustments, etc) and she saw him yelling at the ref. She asked "why the outrage?" Then he said the ref told him he didn't think the ball broke the plane and Holmgren said, "well why didn't you make that call on the field?" That's my main beef with that call. Man, I didn't understand what Holmgren said at halftime enough if that's what he was saying. He's going to be an interesting guy to get in an interview whenever his big one happens.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:22 PM) He gave him a little shove, was it minor? Sure, but it caused seperation allowing the catch. He also got separation just by changing directions. He put an actual good move on the DB. Had he not had his hand there...the play would have looked exactly the same.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:19 PM) On #3, the ball was dropped. It's not so much that the ref though conclusiveness or inconclusiveness, it's what he called. He told Holmgren that he didn't think Ben broke the plane. Holmgren yelled at him asking why he didn't make that call. Notice the ref didn't say, "there was inconclusive evidence" according to Holmgren. He said he didn't think Ben broke the plane. That's a huge call. Wait a second, so the ref told Holmgren that the ball didn't break the plane, but made the opposite ruling while on the field? Wha?

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:18 PM) Yikes, I'm absolutely shocked there is such an outrage about the officiating. That pass interference call in the endzone was pass interference, period. He extended his arm giving him room to make that catch. The Ben play can go either way the aj comparison is perfect. The only horrible call I saw was the chop block by Matt, I didn't see that. Pitt won this game, I guess when your team doesn't win there is just always going to be complaining about officials. Also whoever verified that there wasn't holding because John Madden says there wasn't...HELLO, it's John f***in Madden. They showed the replay of that holding call. There was nothing that struck my eyes as holding either. Nothing even close. The Steelers line had a bunch of plays that would have been called holding if that standard was their holding standard. Don't care what Madden says except in that it agrees with what my eyes saw. Extending your arm does not equal a pushoff. You can extend your arm without pushing off. If there was a push...it was incredibly minor.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 11:59 AM) Yeah, any chance at 70 for the Pistons is all but gone. They just need to focus on winning the East and getting home-court. They're only 2.5 games ahead of the Spurs and Mavs right now. At some point this season, one of their top 5 guys will be hurt in some way, shape, or form. And they will lose a couple games if and when that happens.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:04 PM) I'm not about to read through this whole thread. So forgive me if this has already been mentioned. But is it me, or is Mcjagger the ugliest motherf***er in the history of mankind? Keith Richards insists he has never lost that honor. He will begin downing vast amounts of drugs again so as to leave no doubt.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 08:01 PM) Watch the replay again, you can clearly see the ref starting to pull it out directly after the catch, he just has trouble getting it out. Doesn't matter...the call was still a very poor call. In a vacuum, I would have been able to live with it. But then every other officiating-related break went against the Hawks after it. That one I'll 1/2 agree with you...I don't think that there was proof either way. I sure couldnt' see that 1-2 inches did. But I couldn't clearly see that 1-2 inches didn't either, so the call on the field should have stood. He flung his body at the ground directly towards the ball carrier. He was way to the side of each of the blockers. There's no way he was going after anything except making the tackle. He doesn't need to look at the ball carrier either...that was a legal attempt at a tackle. If he was trying to go through the blocker, he sure made an interesting choice of having his knees under the blocker while his body was directly under the ball carrier.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 5, 2006 -> 07:59 PM) Good points. Also, the NFL is the one league arrogant enough to fix a game IMO with their holier than thou attitude about their "great league" and it's popularity, fueled by gambling. Plus, the NFL seems to always cater to the popular teams (see: coin toss) and all that money changing hands just is too damn tempting to not try and mess with. If I had to point to 1 game in my lifetime that I thought was rigged...it's not this one, it's not even NFL. It's that game 6 between the Lakers and the Kings a few years ago, in like 01 or whatever year it was. Playing in Sacto, Sacramento plays a good game overall, but the Lakers win basically because the Kings had like 3-4 times as many fouls called on them as the Lakers, thus giving the NBA exactly what it would have wanted...the game 7 between the 2 best teams. I will probably go to my grave saying that the NBA told it's refs to make sure there was a game 7, and any time there is a game officiated so badly that people ask if it could have been rigged, I'll point to that game as the most obvious example ever.