TreeA10

A longish article about COVID and the vaccine with data where possible and without spin or political leanings best I can tell. https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2021/08/23/lets_stop_pretending_about_the_covid-19_vaccines_791050.html

My wife loves watching this stuff and this morning, there was a Silver Medalist gymnast being interviewed. Instead of asking her about her path to the Olympics, her work hours, and her achievement, the idiot interviewer is asking the Medal winning gymnast what she thinks of Simone Biles. I was impressed with her answers as a solid supporting teammate but it's was another conversation about a non-winner eclipsing the accomplishments of a winner.

Can't recall seeing any paint scheme like that. Anybody know the background behind it?

Glad to hear hiring is turned back on. Hopefully, the food will be better by the time you get here.

Crenshaw released an hour long podcast on CRT on Jine 3rd. Can't recall if he accurately describes it but I'm pretty sure he knows what it is.

I have no problem casting doubt on both. Some county in CA reduced their COVID death count by 25% after reviewing death causes. I'm sure all the VAERS data can be thinned out as well but why the massive increase in numbers? Reduce the VAERS data by 50% and you still have the same number of deaths in 6 months that usually occurred over years.

Listening to a podcast the other day and heard an interesting numbers comparison from the VAERS data. VAERS is the government reporting system for Vaccine Adverse Reactions. In a 4 or 5 year period @2010, 2000+ people died from vaccine reactions. Since the beginning of this year, over 5000 people have died from vaccine reactions. Years vs months and 2000 vs 5000. Those are hard data numbers from HHS. Something isn't right.

It was weird to hear "Russian aircraft, this is US warship EZ on guard" calls the other day leaving Hawaii.

Most overturned court in the country tees another one up for the SCOTUS. Should be interesting.

You must hate puppies, too! What I liked about the 75 was the ability to takeoff or land on short runways like SNA, LGA, DCA or high pressure altitude airports like Quito or Lapaz with no problems at all. Lots of power even with an engine out. 727 was like a Harley. Lots of smoke and noise. It didn't really climb as much as the curvature of the Earth just fell away over time. 737-800 was a surface departure waiting to happen. 767 was...meh. 787 was a comfy long haul Starship Enterprise-ish ride. 777 lies between the 76 and 78.

I guess I need to choose the correct wife then, don't I. I'd go with the 757 with the Rolls Royce motors. Long legs, big hooters. Loved flying that jet. Friggin' typos......

At AA, our international flying is still greatly curtailed. For instance, this month and next, there is no DFW to Asia flying on the 777 and only 1 flight per day to Heathrow vs the normal 3 or 4 and only Buenos Aires on South America. The airline is using the wife body jets to fly a lot of domestic trips like DFW to MIA/JFK/LAX/LAS. I just flew to HNL and we were completely full there and back on a -300 with 310-ish pax. So, domestically, flying is definitely back but not so much internationally.

This was before my time but the most remarkable thing I've heard was from a dude that got lost in the system when the DC-10 went away. Somehow, the company just lost track of him and never scheduled him for training on a new jet so he went about a year and a half before they finally caught up with him.

I went 105 days between trips on the 787 although I had to do a Sim to update landing currency.

There's crazy then there is full on, deranged crazy. I think this is the latter. https://detroitdailynews.com/2021/05/24/morgue-worker-arrested-after-giving-birth-to-a-dead-mans-baby/

9-0 is pretty freaking amazing regarding guns. Did not see that one coming.

I think the answer to that question should be between the planet and it's attending astrophysicist.

Varies on the crew, timing, location, etc. That being said, I've been to numerous dinners out with the entire crew, including flight attendants. Best have been Paris, Madrid, and Santiago. Lots of just pilots dinners, pubs, museums, tours, and hikes. Same sort of stuff happens on domestic trips but the international stuff sounds cooler. So, yes, crews do get together socially. I've taken the wife on lots of domestic trips with a long layover and a few international trips. Scored major points taking her to Paris and the Palace of Versailles for Valentines Day. Eating healthy gets tricky. Make good choices and don't eat everything that someone puts in front of you. The really dedicated guys bring their own food. I'm not that dedicated.

Switched from Sprint to T-Mobile several months ago. Same service, half the cost with their military discount. Yes, is worth it.

Another way to look at it is efficiency. Most amount of work in the least amount of time. Bidding strategery will vary depending on seniority and a few other factors. At AA, I will bid reserve when I have vacation because I'll get more paid hours while flying very little if at all. I fly 777 international because I can work 12 days, 4 three day or 3 four day trips, or less, 9 days is possible with the right seniority, and making more than a domestic pilot flying 15+ days.

My point was to establish an accepted scientific definition that allows for further conversation. Whether you are for or against abortion, I think it is important to start with accurate terminology about what we are dealing with.

I've still got airline friends but they are harder to coordinate things with due to scheduling. I see a lot more of my neighbors, church group, etc. and, just like my AF friends, they call me, I call them when I need help or they need help, meet up for dinner, whatever. I left Active Duty and went into the Reserves as a full timer then went part time and to the airlines so my transition out of the military was gradual. You will be fine and, I'm guessing, much happier.

My apologies for the thread derailment. I made no mention of an egg fertilized, fried, or scrambled. I just said a single or multicellular organism. It's a simple question.

It's a very simple question and I'm not sure what more clarification I could add. The discovery of a single cell or multi-cell organism on another planet would be defined by scientists as?

If the mars rover had the capability and it found a single cell organism or, more impressively, a multicell organism on that distant planet, all the scientists on this planet would say we have discovered what? A) A non-viable mass. B) an inconvenience C) life.