bjango53 - Posted - 09/07/2014:  01:44:20

We is spinning uncontrollably around a thermo nuclear fireball, what does everyone expect ? 

From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 09/07/2014:  03:31:16

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldwoodchuckb

Good to see that Richard Dress hasn't wasted his time getting any education during his time out. I'm all in favour of stubborn ignorance - it actually makes the job of educating folks with open minds so much easier.

But if Richard keeps bringing up and ranting about Global Warming, and Climate Change, isn't he already breaking the No Politics rule of the BHO forums? Especially when he starts calling everyone who disagrees with him by derogatory names that he apparently learns from watching Bill O'Really?

I'm not saying it is yet time to ban Richard again, but perhaps he should curb his enthusiasm for spouting various right wing agendas on a NO Politics forum, or people will really start replying to his nonsense, and the forums will once again devolve into political camps sniping back and forth --- and you know religion won't be far behind.

I'm neutral on the subject. I can live with a no politics forum and I can live with a heavy politics forum. but I will not stick around a Right Wing Only Politics Forum. If I wanted to watch the Mighty Righteous Power Trippers battling straw men I could tune in to Fox News, 24 hours a day.

---

I agree with you that there should be no politics, but if you think Richard should be banned then you indict yourself with the left wing mantras you wrote.

ken

country frank - Posted - 09/07/2014:  03:39:46

Wait a minute, let's all get our priorities in check here..

Richard were you part of the Seldom Scene?, if so, that is way cool and I am donning my hat to you right now.

Regards from (warmer than the 1950s) London

Don Borchelt - Posted - 09/07/2014:  05:56:18

The Old Woodchuck wrote: "But if Richard keeps bringing up and ranting about Global Warming, and Climate Change, isn't he already breaking the No Politics rule of the BHO forums?"

Well, actually, I don't think that's how Eric and the mods are interpreting the rule.  Perhaps I'm just not paying close enough attention, but in my observation threads about issues like global warming, gun control, combating terrorism, etc., seem to get a pass, even though they are hot political issues.  They only get locked when they get very uncivil, or if political figures like the President, other national politicians, or their parties, are brought heavily into the discussion.  So it is okay to say because of global warming we should be reducing our carbon footprint, but not okay to say that to fight global warming, we must vote out all the Republicans.  I think I have that right.

Edited by - Don Borchelt on 09/07/2014 05:56:56

Hotrodtruck - Posted - 09/07/2014:  06:17:01

I just hope that global warming will prevent the glaciers from advancing so far south, during the next Ice Age!

Mike

oldwoodchuckb - Posted - 09/07/2014:  09:32:41

Then it is a fair topic?

Fair enough. Allow me to inject some facts into the topic.

The Rise in atmospheric CO2 and the consequent rise in global temperature has been dramatic in the last 250 years - since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Right Now, the Earth is warming faster than it has at any time in the past that can actually be researched.

Temperatures are increasing and we are not waiting for the effects of global warming on life - We are living with them.

The Northwest Passage is frequently ice free and open to surface ships for the first time since the Cretaceous.

Tropical ocean fish are moving into the temperate zones and temperate zone fish are showing up in polar oceans.

The biggest global extinction event since the Permian Extinction is going on right now, much of it directly related to the effects of the Industrial Revolution.

The "cessation of global warming" so hungrily jumped on by the warming deniers, is actually not happening. For reasons unknown at this time, the extra heat seems to have been going into the oceans for the last couple decades. This cannot last forever.

The planet does indeed have a way of self regulating it's temperature. This however, is not a pretty hope for the future. The currents in the global ocean tend to move warm water north, and cold water south, modifying the temperature for the continents. As the polar ice melts vast amounts of fresh water are added to the salt water of the ocean. If the sea grows too fresh these currents could stop flowing. Then we will see rapid temperature drops - perhaps even another ice age. 

We don't have the ability to change the past, and we may not actually have the ability to stop global warming today, but it is definitely worth pursuing. However, sitting around pretending that some God will save our bacon before we reach the point where man becomes a victim of the current extinction event, or worse, pretending nothing is happening, will only precipitate the changes. 

When you check out the produce section of your local market notice the prices. They are high now, but that is just a drop in the bucket to what they will be when California can no longer grow our crops. I've heard the "We'll just move farther north then" excuse. I'm sure that could happen. But it will not be a clean migration, and millions, perhaps billions will die prematurely.

I'm almost 70 years old, so most of the real interesting effects - food riots, refugees pouring up from the south, forest die off from increased insect infestation, etc will happen after I'm gone. So have fun you younger guys. It's your planet now. Decide what you are willing to sacrifice for the sake of that gas guzzler.

Edited by - oldwoodchuckb on 09/07/2014 09:35:29

oldwoodchuckb - Posted - 09/07/2014:  09:50:25

Greylock to Beanblossom,

I did not say that Richard should be banned again. I said he should curb his enthusiasm for right wing rants. Those of us who have been here a while know from the past that when anyone disagrees with him, Richard moves quickly from having opinions to shouting abuse. 

If he is willing to stick to the rules, then I say welcome him. But it seems to me he has already brought politics into this conversation and is already using abusive terms toward those who disagree with him. Take a few minutes to read the several abusive terms for liberals, climate scientists etc. he has already used in just this thread. 

If others really want a complete free-for-all, just like the usenets, I suppose it could have some benefits for someone - but not to banjo playing or to banjo players. 

Edited by - oldwoodchuckb on 09/07/2014 09:51:42

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/07/2014:  09:55:40

It's not really helpful to start your shoveling, Woody.  I am not doing it,  I already spend enough time with this topic on my FaceBook wall.  None of what you stated above are facts.  Please check your stuff first.

If you really think you know something about it, then go post on my wall andI  will answer you.  Not many people are brave enough to do that.  I will be glad to deal with you in that forum.  

In the meantime, a word to the wise:  if you are a warmist as you say, then let me make you aware that officially the topic of "climate change" is NOT political.  It is settled science.  That is the party line.

We can talk about global warming here as it is relevant, we can joke about it, we can talk about the good old days.  But we can't preach about it.  That is not necessary.  This thread is for having fun and exposing ugly faces.

Edited by - Richard Dress on 09/07/2014 09:57:22

From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 09/07/2014:  10:00:15

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldwoodchuckb

Greylock to Beanblossom,

I did not say that Richard should be banned again. I said he should curb his enthusiasm for right wing rants. Those of us who have been here a while know from the past that when anyone disagrees with him, Richard moves quickly from having opinions to shouting abuse. 

If he is willing to stick to the rules, then I say welcome him. But it seems to me he has already brought politics into this conversation and is already using abusive terms toward those who disagree with him. Take a few minutes to read the several abusive terms for liberals, climate scientists etc. he has already used in just this thread. 

If others really want a complete free-for-all, just like the usenets, I suppose it could have some benefits for someone - but not to banjo playing or to banjo players. 

---

Tony,

I have the greatest respect and admiration for your banjo skills, knowledge, teaching, dedication and sharing. However we differ in that I like Fox News and Bill O'reilly and you said some things about them that were belittling to me. I have no problem with you cheering for the left side of the aisle and me cheering for the right side of the aisle. I would just like that to not to be on the hangout and to interfere with my banjo relation with you. My brother and I cheer for different sides if the aisle and we have a great relationship. So my request to you is to not make comments like you did. If I loose it sometime and cross the line with comments like that, please remind me that I need to keep this a BANJO website.I know we both want to keep it that way, regardless of what others do.

Respectfully,

ken

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/07/2014:  10:24:16

Several posters have already made claims that are untrue and intended to be damaging, but their motives are clear enough and I don't need to address what is evident to every reader.  

But you are being a pest with your accusations.  Don't make vague assertions--please go ahead and list all those mean words I used.  I would be interested knowing exactly what gets you so wound up.

oldwoodchuckb - Posted - 09/08/2014:  01:09:07

I've already seen "warmists" and "progbots" both are pretty Fox News style insults - like Lamestream Media and other clever conservative comebacks, used whenever there is no way of defending a position. I also know that in the past Richard tends to ramp up his language bit by bit.

I've carefully avoided any terms like "coldists" and "conservabots", because like warmist and progbots they are only insults, meant to raise the temperature of the discussion without adding any useful insight. I've traded insults with Richard in the past but long ago determined that he will never accept any view but the one he gets from right wing sources - if indeed he actually believes them. I now simply state the facts as I did in the post above. Notice that Richard has not posted any answer to the actual facts - he ignores such posts and just keeps tossing out his insults.

So welcome back Richard. The BHO is so liberal these days that your lone conservative voice here in the progressive wilderness is needed to prevent the forum from becoming an NPR repeater station.

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/08/2014:  07:07:41

That is lame, Woody.  So very lame.  I don't watch Fox News, Woody.  I don't have  TV--I spend my time on useful pursuits.

If you were at all current with the global warming debate you would recognize that 'denier' and 'warmist' are the terms your media uses to write about the issue.

'Progbot' is a word I personally coined .  You don't know what it means, and I do not give you permission to use it.  You are not qualified to use it and you are not qualified to speak on the global warming issue.  You would be totally lost participating on my FaceBook threads on Climate Change.  Please stay away from FB.  You would only waste my time and insult my readers.

banjoy - Posted - 09/08/2014:  07:50:39

... so how is this thread about "Other Banjo Related Topics" 

Edited by - banjoy on 09/08/2014 07:51:00

Constitutional Peasant - Posted - 09/08/2014:  07:54:25

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldwoodchuckb

 

Those of us who have been here a while know from the past that when anyone disagrees with him, Richard moves quickly from having opinions to shouting abuse. 

 

---

Not speaking for Richard, but those of us who have been here a while would say that that is often characteristic of your posts.

In some of your posts here it seems you have been guilty of the same things that you find fault in others for.

Banjophobic - Posted - 09/08/2014:  08:09:13

If anyone needs to see the reason for the lockout , you are getting a regurgitation in this thread. All it takes is one thread upon the return to head it for a lockdown. This is the "Banjo Hangout "  and it would sure be great to get back to topics with banjo in them here.

Mods and banjo readers, can I get an 'amen'..(wink). 

Laurence Diehl - Posted - 09/08/2014:  08:46:07

No John, I think people are bored with the same old banjo topics. Should I anchor 2? Do I need to wear picks? Is everything I ever need to know covered in MOTFSB? So it must be time to arm wrestle about climate change. For myself, I tend to believe the evidence presented by thousands of climate scientists rather than some wingnut on Fox news - even if the truth is "inconvenient", but I don't expect any minds will be changed here.

I will skip these kinds of threads in the future.

chuckv97 - Posted - 09/08/2014:  08:54:29

Hmmm.........wonder if a wingnut would work better on my capo?.....

Banjophobic - Posted - 09/08/2014:  08:57:24

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurence Diehl

No John, I think people are bored with the same old banjo topics. Should I anchor 2? Do I need to wear picks? Is everything I ever need to know covered in MOTFSB? So it must be time to arm wrestle about climate change. For myself, I tend to believe the evidence presented by thousands of climate scientists rather than some wingnut on Fox news - even if the truth is "inconvenient", but I don't expect any minds will be changed here.

I will skip these kinds of threads in the future.

---

And this thread should be in the 'non banjo' section anyway.....

dmiller - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:02:50

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

Hmmm.........wonder if a wingnut would work better on my capo?.....

---

Hey Chuck - - if you can't find a wingnut, I've got a rubber band and a pencil

I can let you have.  It's "cutting edge" technology for capoing the banjo!  

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:03:44

That brings us back to the original question.  You seem to know why I was locked out.  That is more than I know.  Maybe you can also explain why it was unlocked.  Perhaps you can explain why the box was locked by a mod but inside it was locked by the member.  An impossible combination, as far as I can tell.  Actually, I doubt you can explain it to Old Ron either.

But you are probably right.  I infuriated so many so many liberals last time by crushing them intellectually (as above) that they set up such a communal squeal that a sympathetic mod gave in to them.  So far I have been accused of using a common word from the media.  Such a grave offense!  I think this thread shows how these small people work--it's like a forest of tree frogs on a summer night.

I was locked out I still got all I needed from the HO as before.  I read it every day.  I just didn't have to contribute anything--what an enormous time saver.  Did anyone notice how the website traffic dropped off and the Scruggs Forum withered away?  The liberals were happy but I don't believe they did the HO any favors.  Despite the disrespect I still helped out struggling members now and then.

So lock me out for calling old Woody a warmist, if your self esteem can manage it.  I have many better things to do, even though it is fun to tease liberals and even though helping lost banjo pickers is rewarding.

From Greylock to Bean Blossom - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:03:59

I am out of here with the big Unsubscribe from this topic  button. Even the people that protest the topic have to leave a dig before they depart.

Nobody has asked the pertinent question regarding climate change: "What would Earl say?"

ken

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:18:00

Actually, I didn't call Woody a warmist.  I just used it in a general sense.  So what's the beef?  I think I'll unsubscribe too.  That'll teach you all to mock me.  Besides this thread already has racked up too many hits. It makes the others look bad.  Sorry.

dmiller - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:20:27

quote:

---

Originally posted by From Greylock to Bean Blossom

Nobody has asked the pertinent question regarding climate change: "What would Earl say?"

ken

---

Hot corn cold corn bring along your demijohn    

banjo bill-e - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:24:27

I would think that we could discuss politics, religion, and perhaps even banjos if posters would simply treat the other members here with a common respect. Is it truly impossible to state your position without insulting those who see it differently?
How about instead of fighting old battles all over again and going back to right imagined wrongs from years past that Richard, his supporters and opponents try a fresh start, this time with some common courtesy?

Bill Rogers - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:28:31

 I second those sentiments.  

Banjophobic - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:32:52

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dress

That brings us back to the original question.  You seem to know why I was locked out.  That is more than I know.  Maybe you can also explain why it was unlocked. anyone notice how the website traffic dropped off and the Scruggs Forum withered away?  

---

You were locked out for continually breaking forum rules, which is evidenced by this content of this thread, I am guessing. The reason it was unlocked seems contrived to me. I have not noticed the Scruggs forum traffic 'withering away', other than  the usual ebb and flow that occurs with summer/winter. I really do not think any one individual on this website determines that forums health by just being there, except to contribute to its bad karma. to think otherwise shows some egocentric rationality.

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:34:21

The only discourtesy (goodness gracious!) I see is people making vague assertions, which when looked at prove to be vapid nonsense.  So who exactly is being discourteous, Bill?  Who is being insulting?  What are the insults?  I mean other than the vague accusations that have been so popular on this thread.

Actually, Bill, your suggestion is a good one.  But as you can see, if you can stand going through six pages, that I attract a lot of hate from the liberals here and it is difficult not to respond,  But I think my responses have been calm and proper.  I do what I can to deflect this from becoming a thread on global warming.  I am not interested in talking to banjo pickers about advanced scientific issues.  I take care of that urge on FB.

Edited by - Richard Dress on 09/08/2014 09:42:02

pickNgrin - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:41:34

I think that anybody who is a warmist, coldist, or lukewarmist ought to heed Richard's suggestion to take the whole mess to his facebook page where he will be glad to argue that stupid stuff with you till both of you are blue in the face. Or you could take it to any number of forums specifically dedicated to climate change. Or... if you simply must discuss this stuff with only banjo players, take it to the banjo holler. Don't they allow political stuff?

That will leave this site free to talk about other things such as... i don't know.... banjos!

Edited by - pickNgrin on 09/08/2014 09:41:53

BanjoLink - Posted - 09/08/2014:  09:47:05

quote:

---

Originally posted by kipperr

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldwoodchuckb

 

Those of us who have been here a while know from the past that when anyone disagrees with him, Richard moves quickly from having opinions to shouting abuse.  

---

Not speaking for Richard, but those of us who have been here a while would say that that is often characteristic of your posts.

In some of your posts here it seems you have been guilty of the same things that you find fault in others for.

---

LOL Kip  -  I was getting to write the same exact thing.  It is not the name calling that is the problem.  It's name calling someone likes versus name calling someone doesn't like!  It is hilarious reading all about conservative slanted programming from people who claim not to watch it.  Let me guess, they hear about it from their left leaning programs who tell them what the conservative commentators said  -  and of course completely in context.

banjo bill-e - Posted - 09/08/2014:  10:26:23

Individuals are complex, with an enormous variety of life experiences, beliefs, contradictions, prejudices, and personal mythologies. When a label is applied, they are reduced to a simple cartoon called "liberal" or right-winger" or whatever. Which is convenient because then we no longer have to consider them as real people or give any weight to what they say, after all, we know all about what liberals and right-wingers think, don't we? So for many, "liberal" means "person that I don't like and won't listen to and will oppose any position they take on any matter---before I even hear what they have to say", and of course the reverse is the exact same. Can we really define a person by their choice of cable news network?
If so, please note that I don't waste my time on any of them.

The only reason that I am posting in this thread is that I see it as a symptom of a bigger societal problem. Our country is very divided right now with a great deal of anger. I believe that this is by design. We are kept divided and agitated and all stirred up about this and that, and that is how we are kept in line. God forbid that the great majority should ever get together on----anything, because then our elected leaders would then find it most difficult to maintain the status quo.
And the status quo is very, very good for an elite few.
So it matters little if the topic of the day is guns or abortion or global warming or taxes or whatever. Because if you need a reason to hate and belittle and add to the divisiveness and anger, there will always be another reason. And providing those reasons seems to me to be why those aforementioned cable news networks exist at all.

Don Borchelt - Posted - 09/08/2014:  10:28:08

Joe Downes wrote:  "Could it be that climate change is also responsible for the rise in relative stupidity?"

I don't think that humanity has gotten any stupider, Joe, it's just that you and me, we've gotten a whole lot smarter.  So they all seem stupider.

- Don Borchelt

P.S.  Governor Christie has asked me to ask you just how you built all those dikes you have over there without spending tax dollars.

banjoy - Posted - 09/08/2014:  10:46:56

I don't know, but in terms of Banjo Related topics, Richard, you have in the past posted audio files that were not you, and let everyone think they were you. I once even commented on them a looooong time ago, "Man, that guy can really play banjo" I posted to a thread of yours or that you were involved in. You never corrected me in that thread way back when, but I later figured out it was not you at all.

In this thread someone gave you kudos for being involved with the Seldom Scene. You did not correct that member either and it's right here in this thread.. You've never been in that band (you may be their friends but that's not being involved with the band, and certainly not a member of the band!) but you're okay with leaving that post uncorrected? You're okay with having folks think you were in The Seldom Scene? You seem to only be interested in Climate Change or whatever you want to call it.

I agree, it would be nice to have nice dialog here, and Richard, you and I had conversed quite a bit soon after you got booted, through your YouTube channel. You seem like a nice guy. Why assume the same old tonality here?

Except for one person who took your flame-bait, in my opinion, it's beating a dead horse. All you're gonna get is smell and flies.

If you actually have something to say and to contribute, I'm all for your return here. If this thread is an example of all we're gonna see and hear from you, then I got some banjo picking to do instead, and feel free to knock yourself silly.

Edited by - banjoy on 09/08/2014 10:47:27

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/08/2014:  11:06:00

BJ, I have never posted something that wasn't me.  I don't recall any such thing.  Could it be a misunderstanding?  It would be nice to back up an accusation like that.  All the audio files I ever posted are still on my homepage, I believe.  

I don't do that.  I don't have to.  If it happened as you say it must have been a mistake.

As for the Seldom Scene, I never said I was a member.  Go read my bio.  Do I have to respond to everything, every assertion, every blind accusation, that comes along?  That's all I have been doing in this thread so far.  OK, the rumor that I was in the Seldom Scene is false.  There.  People say that because John Duffey and I and a bunch went to see 'I am Curious Yellow' once at a movie theater in Bethesda and were a little raucous.

Really, if you want to know the story about me and the Seldom Scene google the news stories about it.  I don't like to brag on my homepage.  The story has been on TV too, I believe.  Mike Aulldridge brought the incident up in an interview before he died, but he didn't mention my name that time though.

Edited by - Richard Dress on 09/08/2014 11:09:53