Search results

I'm not yet sure I agree with you (actually, on most everything you've said here I agree with you)...the only thing I'm pondering is the criticism of the 'support mechanism' (Soros, etc). I'm not interested in discussing or debating the partisan side of this (though I agree with your Duke...

Wow. Thanks for the link. I can clearly state that I disagree with much of what is attributed to those web sites, but I'm not yet sure (I'm thinking about it) that I fault those who financially support forums where alternate, non-corporate, 'less edited' (my term) news and opinions are...

Shoe: >I simply trust God that this situation was >exactly as it says No Shoe, you do not trust it "exactly as it says". You have demonstrated this so clearly in your posts on this thread that I am amazed that you can now make that statement with a hint of seriousness. You trust it...

Not as the story is told, no. I'll start a quote: Gen 6:7 >And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have >created from the face of the earth; both man, and >beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; The basic answer to your basic question: A god that I would...

"god" can act however he wishes. I will only respect a "god worth his salt" however. JB

Shoe: >In Genesis 41:56, the King James Version states >"the famine was over all the face of the earth." >Now I don't believe anyone would interpret that >globally. Me: >Shoe, you are the only Christian I know that >DOESN'T interpret that to mean globally. Shoe >It is...

Shoe: >In Genesis 41:56, the King James Version states >"the famine was over all the face of the earth." >Now I don't believe anyone would interpret that >globally. Shoe, you are the only Christian I know that DOESN'T interpret that to mean globally. JB

Then you don't believe in the gospel being spread through the holy spirit of any other myriad of ways available to god. (though this shouldn't surprise me since many previous posts of yours prove your belief in a god with very limited powers) JB

I'm not headed anywhere...YOU made an assertion and emphasized it with "of course" as if it was a widely known fact. I'm asking how you know that the lord (who was certainly as powerful then as now) didn't spread his gospel to the Aboriginees way back then? The fact that they aren't...

Shoe: >Of course, the gospel had not gone to the Aboriginees.. "Of course"... ?? And you know this how? JB

ART, back on his little wheel. JB

And most are...even here on ET. JB

Just so you know Wags, I've tried to view your links several times and have been unsuccessful each time. Some problem with them JB

Dr. Trader. If you have not yet learned about the ignore feature here on ET then NOW is the time. I would be proud of my MBA also (if I had one). I am proud of other things. I do not buy into the accusations of hubris as applied to you. Cranks will be cranks. Best wishes. JB

Well, I can see that Nitro and ElCubano have both been SERVED! It's ON!!!!!! JB PS. El, if you don't get me your name like right NOW I won't have time to get a pass for you for the Sat game. I've offered the same to Nitro when we are in Chicago in a few weeks. Looking forward to it.

>Isn't that the best way to get volatility which >something a lot of traders need. The volatality following gaps can be some of the most 'random' volatility seen as participants attempt to come to a consensus repricing of a instrument whose value has changed dramatically and quickly. It...

James...James?...it that you? :-) JB

The news is definitely out!!! JB

Well, if there are I'm sure they will come'a runnin' to that sort of line. JB

>if the screen test has a 5% false positive rate and 1 >person out of 500 is actually infected, that means you >will see 1 real case and 25 false positives in each >hypothetical group of 500 tested >Therefore you can calculate the probability simply dividing >1 by 26 = 3.846 Sure...