StrangeSox

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Apr 4, 2007 -> 05:25 PM) That's because it's not right. The team left 8 runners on base, the players individual left 19 on base. I'm confused as to what that means? Say Player A is on base, and Player B and C both fail drive him in. That counts as players individually leaving 2 on base? Can we pull any positives out of the first two games?

Zone's just a wee bit tight, today. As long as its called fairly both ways...

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 08:33 PM) this is where we (USA) are just a bunch idiots. went to italy 2 years ago. most restaurants had the menu written in at least 6 different languages. (spanish, italian, german, english, french and japanese) and we like to b**** about 1. what a joke. But the Chinese Italians Irish Germans Mexicans are invading and are going to ruin this country! Just like all of those large influxes in the past! In all fairness, its very easy for people from different countries to visit Italy due to their proximities. America is much larger and separated from every other language but Spanish and a little French by some big oceans. Also, in Hawaii, an awful lot of stuff is in Japanese. Just thought I'd throw that out there. I've got some reservations about bilingual education. Every effort should be made to teach the kids English, but we can't have them falling drastically behind in every other subject.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 05:04 PM) Not sure where your getting at with the photo Sorry, wrong link. http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/...n-analysis.html There you go. Its basically just an extended part of that second video I posted, though.

This thing just basically tears Loose Change a few new assholes. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3...ew+loose+change

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt...ficial%26sa%3DN Here's something that seems to thoroughly debunk the cruise missile theory, a central point in "loose change"

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 03:16 PM) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=78...;q=loose+change 5,256,507 views 29218 ratings 4.5/5 star rating. Doesn't sound like a film with enormous glaring errors to the majority. The majority also don't have any technical and scientific background on which to judge. The opinions of non-experts don't really matter. They also routinely quote out-of-context, don't provide sources or dates, or use quotes from within a few days or the day of when tons of misinformation was around instead of using quotes from after research and investigation was done. It's a very misleading piece and many people might not readily pick up on that stuff.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 02:59 PM) The flick is 151 mins long. They have plenty of relevent experts. Of course at least a 1/3 of the population would not even realize that because of their refusal to even watch it. I am not suggesting to side with anyone. Don't take the word of Loose Change. I do suggest watching it, research the claims ( google, Library ect) . Debunk the myths yourself if you can. I've watched maybe 30 or 45 minutes total of the movie. That was enough. Almost every single one of their basic premises were wrong -- usually because they just don't know what they're talking about because they appear to lack even a basic understanding of engineering, physics, and material science. I've seen enough enormous glaring errors in what I've watched to discredit anything else they might claim. In the debate posted earlier, their lack of knowledge was clearly exposed when it came to their UL expert and the steel ratings. The researcher refused to admit that UL doesn't certify steel. Anyone with a background knowledge on steel would know that. Anyone who did research trying to prove that the steel couldn't fail SHOULD know that.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 02:42 PM) I can understand if there really is no footage . But fact is, there was. 45 tapes of local businesses in the pentagon area were confiscated by the FBI. Why? Why release only one shot with a bad view and angle? They can release the tapes anytime and shut everyone up, thats includes scholars, Engineers,scientists and former millitary personal. I highly disagree. Popular mechanics did not answer numerous questions. For one, they totally avoided the cell phone frequency level at cruising level. Why? Me thinks they came unprepared for the debate. They changed the subject many times during the debate. They said that they went and spoke with experts who told them that calls can be made but that they are frequently dropped, but that this matches phone records and people's accounts of what happens. The LC guys then tried saying that airlines installing cell phone equipment proves that they couldn't make calls and then quickly moved on to something else. My favorite part was how PM kept bringing up how "real journalists" go and talk to relevant experts and kept asking them if they ever did. Of course, their answer was always "no" or "they wouldn't return our calls." PM doesn't claim to have all of the answers for what happened that day and said as much at the end of the interview. But LC claims to know all of the answers because they don't know other things. "Nothing comes from nothing" and its just a logical fallacy. QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 02:50 PM) not even limited footage of the plane while airborne? Something in the 45 tapes should have something that is not so secretive, right? We have a lot of eye witnesses that report seeing a plane strike the building and NO eyewitnesses report seeing a cruise missile. There's some quotes about people saying that it "sounded like a cruise missile," but that's just ridiculous. An overwhelming majority of people have never heard a cruise missile or a 747 at 500 MPH only a few feet off of the ground. For comparison, most people can't correctly identify a gunshot from a similar noise, so why should we trust their acoustic identification of a cruise missile vs. a 747?

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 02:33 PM) I wouldn't take that too seriously. That page is not using any intelligent evidence, rather just making it seem like a junior high debate. I'm sure there are better examples to debunk the myths. Popular mechanics seems to do the best job and I am still not 100% sold on Popular mechanics, the loose change guys really seem to hold their ground against them in the debate posted. Check back to that page in a few weeks. Maddox runs "the best page in the universe" and usually just writes satirical articles or rants about things he finds stupid in society and popular culture. It wasn't meant to be serious, just to poke fun at them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Best_Page_In_The_Universe I don't think those Loose Change guys held their ground at all. Especially the "research assistant" or whatever he was called -- all he did was say "you're lying" or scoff at anything they said. They exposed their single "expert" as irrelevant and exposed a lot of the 'science' they used as flawed and misunderstood by them. They didn't really have good answers to anything PM said or refuted and kept changing the subject. As an engineer, "Loose Change" had me laughing out loud at what they were claiming the first time I saw it.

Maddox has a good page up now mocking "Loose Change" http://maddox.xmission.com/

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 10:08 AM) Or there could be more pressure due to all the talk Iguchi has heard about Ozzie and KW expecting more power out of him. While the spot may not warrent added pressure, more pressure can be added simply because of the change, and the expectations that come along with it. Or, as others have said, the extra pressure of batting second forced him to be a smarter hitter. Now that the pressure is off, he may be swinging more freely, but getting worse results. Different people respond in different ways to situations. Its part of the manager's job to place his players into the situations in which they'll respond best.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 08:35 AM) You're right. And leadoff hitters should be able to hit clean-up. And like somebody else was arguing the other day, LF's should be able to pitch and C's should be able to play 1B. I mean, they're professionals! It shouldn't be the manager or coaches' responsibility to put players in a position where they're more likely to succeed. And its just pure coincidence that almost every player in the White Sox organization, from A through the majors, has the same bad approach at the plate and the same holes in their swing. Nothing to do with the coaching staff. We're fools for even thinking about it!

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Apr 3, 2007 -> 02:29 AM) Even a person who thinks that the idea humans are causing global warming is BS like me thinks that C02 can and should be regulated. I mean why the hell wouldn't somebody want cleaner air, or at least to try and create cleaner air? The argument is that it will hurt economically and developmentally. Costs of energy will increase due to tighter emissions controls. That obviously effects every single person and business in this country. Also, more and more money will be dumped into research and development of systems to control CO2 output instead of investing the time and money into other things. So, we need to figure out whether or not CO2 emissions are really as big of a problem as some might think or if its a little overblown.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 06:20 PM) It'd be nice if we had young kids who could come up and immediately produce. Which goes back to bad minor league hitting coaches and maybe bad scouting, too.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:53 PM) "A slam here..." "Two slams and we've got ourselves a ball game"

QUOTE(WCSox @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:25 PM) So, three runs and five hits over three innings against Sabathia is bad? LOL. I was just listing discussion topics, not stating my opinions.

Things already covered in this game for future discussion: 1) Our SP sucks 2) Our BP sucks 3) We're already trying to pull everything/ why does Greg Walker still have a job 4)Over/Under on (meaningless) solo shots on the year Let the fun begin.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:19 PM) A comeback, LOL. The lift and pull crew is trying to jack dongs with every pitch. Captain Cheeseburger might go complete game if we keep up our crazy swinging crap going. Dong #2 jacked. We just need 4-5 more now! Here we come! Hey, at least we're hitting a lefty.

Paulie putting a small smile on my face

QUOTE(scotty22hotty @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:17 PM) 1. Javier Vazquez $=13 2. Mark Buehrle $=8 3. Jon Garland $=7 4. Jose Contreras $=6 IMO Vazquez should have pitched today... a staff of solid questionable #2-3 pitchers Fixed.

I think I might just load up MVP 2005 and make the Sox kick some ass. QUOTE(daa84 @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:12 PM) i shoulda gone to class LOL. Me too.

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:10 PM) come on, can't we just get a scoreless inning? Lets at least be consistent, man!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:07 PM) So...How about those playoff bound Bulls? First round and out?

QUOTE(zenryan @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:06 PM) maybe he doesnt warrant being the number 1. Garland after last season should have been number 1. Garland a staff ace? Don't make me laugh. He's a very solid #2 or #3, but not a #1.