"presley" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
The "new ice age" story was a trial balloon. If it had gotten any
traction,
the data would have come. That's why there were never any real
scientific
papers issued on it.

Hmmm. Quite an interesting opinion you have of scientists. To bring this
back to rec.gardens, I suppose you believe that if gardeners in the arctic
want to grow palms out of doors, or if gardeners in the tropics want to
grow
delphiniums as perennials, scientists will leap out of the woodwork to
prove
that it can easily be done, just because there are people who desire those
results? Why don't we posit those two theories as "trial balloons" and see
how much "traction" they get?


I admit my opinion on scientists have become somewhat cynical over the past
few years over the global warming thing. I believe it is an environmental
agenda and the environmental movement has become less about environmnet and
more about power. They have their own indentured scientists to lend credence
to the theory. Former environmentalists have left the orgs because of it.

I also admit the topic got a little out of hand. Especially with the mixup
that Janet and I had about gas conversion.

As to trial balloons over what will grow where, knock yourself out. I'll
leave that to others.

"James" wrote in message
...

"presley" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
The "new ice age" story was a trial balloon. If it had gotten any
traction,
the data would have come. That's why there were never any real
scientific
papers issued on it.

Hmmm. Quite an interesting opinion you have of scientists. To bring this
back to rec.gardens, I suppose you believe that if gardeners in the
arctic
want to grow palms out of doors, or if gardeners in the tropics want to
grow
delphiniums as perennials, scientists will leap out of the woodwork to
prove
that it can easily be done, just because there are people who desire
those
results? Why don't we posit those two theories as "trial balloons" and
see
how much "traction" they get?


I admit my opinion on scientists have become somewhat cynical over the
past
few years over the global warming thing. I believe it is an environmental
agenda and the environmental movement has become less about environmnet
and
more about power. They have their own indentured scientists to lend
credence
to the theory. Former environmentalists have left the orgs because of it.

I also admit the topic got a little out of hand. Especially with the mixup
that Janet and I had about gas conversion.

As to trial balloons over what will grow where, knock yourself out. I'll
leave that to others.



"Agenda" has become the latest obscenity. People think the
director/producers of the movie "Brokeback Mountain" had an agenda. OK. The
owner of my favorite pizza place has an agenda. I have an agenda. You have
an agenda.

golddog wrote:
[...]
Does anyone else find this thread confusing with replies all over the
place? Must be a better way.



That's why Usenet early on developed the convention of bottom posting,
and of showing the snips. Too many people here top-post, too many people
here snip carelessly, etc. Conventions are arbitrary, but that doesn't
make them pointless. Spalng's a knvnshn, tuu. (And the only reason you
can decipher that is that I'm using a few of the E. spelling conventions.

HTH

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
...

"presley" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
The "new ice age" story was a trial balloon. If it had gotten any
traction,
the data would have come. That's why there were never any real
scientific
papers issued on it.

Hmmm. Quite an interesting opinion you have of scientists. To bring
this
back to rec.gardens, I suppose you believe that if gardeners in the
arctic
want to grow palms out of doors, or if gardeners in the tropics want to
grow
delphiniums as perennials, scientists will leap out of the woodwork to
prove
that it can easily be done, just because there are people who desire
those
results? Why don't we posit those two theories as "trial balloons" and
see
how much "traction" they get?


I admit my opinion on scientists have become somewhat cynical over the
past
few years over the global warming thing. I believe it is an
environmental
agenda and the environmental movement has become less about environmnet
and
more about power. They have their own indentured scientists to lend
credence
to the theory. Former environmentalists have left the orgs because of
it.

I also admit the topic got a little out of hand. Especially with the
mixup
that Janet and I had about gas conversion.

As to trial balloons over what will grow where, knock yourself out. I'll
leave that to others.



"Agenda" has become the latest obscenity. People think the
director/producers of the movie "Brokeback Mountain" had an agenda. OK.
The
owner of my favorite pizza place has an agenda. I have an agenda. You have
an agenda.


If you say so.

Enjoy your newsreader!

Hey.....Who said you could talk about my agenda? *snicker*
Murri

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
...

"presley" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
The "new ice age" story was a trial balloon. If it had gotten any
traction,
the data would have come. That's why there were never any real
scientific
papers issued on it.

Hmmm. Quite an interesting opinion you have of scientists. To bring this
back to rec.gardens, I suppose you believe that if gardeners in the
arctic
want to grow palms out of doors, or if gardeners in the tropics want to
grow
delphiniums as perennials, scientists will leap out of the woodwork to
prove
that it can easily be done, just because there are people who desire
those
results? Why don't we posit those two theories as "trial balloons" and
see
how much "traction" they get?


I admit my opinion on scientists have become somewhat cynical over the
past
few years over the global warming thing. I believe it is an environmental
agenda and the environmental movement has become less about environmnet
and
more about power. They have their own indentured scientists to lend
credence
to the theory. Former environmentalists have left the orgs because of it.

I also admit the topic got a little out of hand. Especially with the
mixup
that Janet and I had about gas conversion.

As to trial balloons over what will grow where, knock yourself out. I'll
leave that to others.



"Agenda" has become the latest obscenity. People think the
director/producers of the movie "Brokeback Mountain" had an agenda. OK.
The owner of my favorite pizza place has an agenda. I have an agenda. You
have an agenda.

The message
from golddog contains these words:


Doug Kanter Wrote:
"Janet Baraclough" wrote in message
...
The message
from "Doug Kanter" contains these words:

Doesn't your news reader show the messages in a hierarchal fashion?

He's not using a newsreader, he's posting via a cheapskate
commercial
UK web portal for numpties. Half its members are still trying to
work
out if this is email or a chatroom.

Janet


Sounds similar to AOL Syndrome. Incurable.

Enjoy your newsreader!

We have one each. Of course we enjoy them, thankyou; you're the one
having a problem reading usent without a newsreader.

Janet

the first people on usenet were scientists and email was linear, not packaged like it
is now, further messages were THREADED like it is now so we KNOW what the topic of
the message is as we scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt
all have puters at home and it would sometimes take days before we got an answer to
an email so it was pretty easy to forget what the person was talking about.
everyone is using readers that THREAD messages, that is line up the posts with the OP
first and then replies as they come in, right?

the problem of bottom posting is the nesting sequence....................

last person to post name at top
next persons name
first persons name
first person message
next persons message
last persons message

..... a lot of the time the nesting is all screwed up with posting in between the
nests and often there is confusion about who said what
along with this is the fact that
1. people rarely snip ANYTHING so the previous messages go on well out of sight and
2. last persons comment is usually of the "me too" variety
..... all this makes me delete the entire post

contrast that with the utter simplicity and cleanness of top posting:

last person to post name at top
last persons message

next persons name
next persons message

first persons name
first person message

now if, for some reason, the reader DOESNT know what the topic is they can scroll
down to the next person they are responding to. OR, they can erase the next person
and respond to the first person.

so instead of:

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

golddog wrote:
[...]
Does anyone else find this thread confusing with replies all over the
place? Must be a better way.



That's why Usenet early on developed the convention of bottom posting,
and of showing the snips. Too many people here top-post, too many people
here snip carelessly, etc. Conventions are arbitrary, but that doesn't
make them pointless. Spalng's a knvnshn, tuu. (And the only reason you
can decipher that is that I'm using a few of the E. spelling conventions.

HTH

It is much more logical if it is:

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
That's why Usenet early on developed the convention of bottom posting,
and of showing the snips. Too many people here top-post, too many people
here snip carelessly, etc. Conventions are arbitrary, but that doesn't
make them pointless. Spalng's a knvnshn, tuu. (And the only reason you
can decipher that is that I'm using a few of the E. spelling conventions.
HTH

golddog wrote:
[...]
Does anyone else find this thread confusing with replies all over the
place? Must be a better way.


Ingrid


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/
sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...s=Group+lookup
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for
any of the recommendations I make.
AND I DID NOT AUTHORIZE ADS AT THE OLD PUREGOLD SITE

The message
from contains these words:

the problem of bottom posting is the nesting sequence....................

The problem with you top posting, is that your posts are so muddled
and back to front they are unreadable.

Janet

wrote:
the first people on usenet were scientists and email was linear, not packaged like it
is now, further messages were THREADED like it is now so we KNOW what the topic of
the message is as we scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt
all have puters at home and it would sometimes take days before we got an answer to
an email so it was pretty easy to forget what the person was talking about.
everyone is using readers that THREAD messages, that is line up the posts with the OP
first and then replies as they come in, right?

the problem of bottom posting is the nesting sequence....................

[snip]


The problem is the mix of top and bottom posting, the inconsistent
and/or careless snipping, etc.

NB that I snipped the rest of your post, which consisted of previous
posts that are more or less irrelevant to my answer to your comment.

There are newsreaders that will display threads in a tree when to
display threads. I don't know about Outlook, since I've never used it.

HTH

"Wolf Kirchmeir" wrote in message

wrote:
the first people on usenet were scientists and email was
linear,
not packaged like it is now, further messages were THREADED
like
it is now so we KNOW what the topic of the message is as we
scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt
all
have puters at home and it would sometimes take days before
we
got an answer to an email so it was pretty easy to forget
what
the person was talking about. everyone is using readers that
THREAD messages, that is line up
the posts with the OP first and then replies as they come in,
right? the problem of bottom posting is the nesting
sequence....................

[snip]


The problem is the mix of top and bottom posting, the
inconsistent
and/or careless snipping, etc.

NB that I snipped the rest of your post, which consisted of
previous
posts that are more or less irrelevant to my answer to your
comment.

There are newsreaders that will display threads in a tree when
to
display threads. I don't know about Outlook, since I've never
used
it.
HTH

Outlook does not do newsgroups.

--


Travis in Shoreline Washington

wrote in message

the first people on usenet were scientists and email was
linear,
not packaged like it is now, further messages were THREADED
like it
is now so we KNOW what the topic of the message is as we scroll
thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt all have
puters at home and it would sometimes take days before we got
an
answer to an email so it was pretty easy to forget what the
person
was talking about.

What the hay is "packaged e-mail"?

--


Travis in Shoreline Washington

Oh Really? Then what I'm reading is a figment of my imagination????!! Or is
it you, Travis, who is a figment?
Murri

"Travis M." wrote in message
news:fX8Ff.640$pY.461@trndny01...
"Wolf Kirchmeir" wrote in message

wrote:
the first people on usenet were scientists and email was linear,
not packaged like it is now, further messages were THREADED like
it is now so we KNOW what the topic of the message is as we
scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt all
have puters at home and it would sometimes take days before we
got an answer to an email so it was pretty easy to forget what
the person was talking about. everyone is using readers that THREAD
messages, that is line up
the posts with the OP first and then replies as they come in,
right? the problem of bottom posting is the nesting
sequence....................

[snip]


The problem is the mix of top and bottom posting, the inconsistent
and/or careless snipping, etc.

NB that I snipped the rest of your post, which consisted of previous
posts that are more or less irrelevant to my answer to your comment.

There are newsreaders that will display threads in a tree when to
display threads. I don't know about Outlook, since I've never used
it.
HTH

Outlook does not do newsgroups.

--


Travis in Shoreline Washington

Who the hell still uses the old version???!!
Or are you trying to gently inform me that Travis is running an ancient copy
of Windows, pre outlook express?
If so, that's sad.
Murri

"Erik Vastmasd" wrote in message
...
Lady Blacksword wrote in of Sat,
4 Feb 2006 16:45:20 -0500:

"Travis M." wrote in message
news:fX8Ff.640$pY.461@trndny01...

Outlook does not do newsgroups.

Oh Really? Then what I'm reading is a figment of my imagination????!! Or
is
it you, Travis, who is a figment?

Murri, Outlook doesn't do newsgroups, Outlook Express does and is a
different programme.

ie: "X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180"

--
Regards Erik Vastmasd

"Lady Blacksword" wrote in message

Oh Really? Then what I'm reading is a figment of my
imagination????!! Or is it you, Travis, who is a figment?
Murri

"Travis M." wrote in message
news:fX8Ff.640$pY.461@trndny01...
"Wolf Kirchmeir" wrote in message

wrote:
the first people on usenet were scientists and email was
linear, not packaged like it is now, further messages
were
THREADED like it is now so we KNOW what the topic of the
message is as we
scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we
didnt
all have puters at home and it would sometimes take days
before we got an answer to an email so it was pretty easy
to forget what
the person was talking about. everyone is using readers
that
THREAD messages, that is line up
the posts with the OP first and then replies as they come
in,
right? the problem of bottom posting is the nesting
sequence....................

[snip]


The problem is the mix of top and bottom posting, the
inconsistent and/or careless snipping, etc.

NB that I snipped the rest of your post, which consisted of
previous posts that are more or less irrelevant to my
answer to
your comment. There are newsreaders that will display
threads in a tree when
to display threads. I don't know about Outlook, since I've
never used it.
HTH

Outlook does not do newsgroups.

You are using Outlook Express 6 not Outlook.

--


Travis in Shoreline Washington