Any of You Do Trikes -- in A Metro Area, Too??

"Bill Baka" wrote in message
et...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Sex is all about reproduction and nothing else. If it deviates from that,
then that is just what it is - a deviation and nothing else. Remember
that
the next time you are ogling the girls. Girls = babies = society = work
until you drop. Now you already know more than most poor slobs will ever
know. No charge - I give this good advice out of the largess of my heart.

That is nature's imperative, to survive until breeding age and then pass
your genes along. If you don't do that you are a Darwinian failure.

Yes, Bill is quite right about this. However, being a failure individually
is not the same thing as causing the species to fail. Not everyone has to
reproduce when there are already too many of us. Any given individual would
only have to worry about reproduction if and when he thought his species (or
his particular group to which he belonged) was failing to insure its own
survival.

But even so too many dumb people are reproducing and not enough smart people
are. That can not be good for the future of the human race.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"GaryG" wrote in message
...

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
news
[...]

The evolutionary process makes all kinds of mistakes Ever hear of
mutations?
Some few are helpful, but most are harmful. It is society that will make
a
place for gays, not nature. Nature will see to it that natural selection
will eliminate any mistakes that do not promote the survival of the
species.
Anyone who thinks that homos were put here by nature to protect siblings
has
got rocks in their heads for brains.

Given that the world population of humans just passed the 6.5 billion
mark,
I don't think the "preservation of the species" argument holds water when
it
comes to the prevalence of homosexuals. In fact, it may be that an
increasing incidence of homosexuals may be just what we need to prevent
drowning in our own filth through over-procreation.

But that will be a decision that will be made by society, not by evolution.
Our evolution is set and it cannot be changed unless we get into the genes
and change them by manipulating them biologically. Since we know that men
are 95% hetero, do you want to live in a world where many of these men will
be encouraged to turn homo to prevent even more births? I think not!

By the way, I continue to believe that 95% of homos are nothing but
perverts. They have freely chosen their life style for immoral reasons of
their own. Nature would never create so many homos. It is strictly a
societal construct and the amount of it that is tolerated is an indicator
of
the moral decay of a society.

Spoken like a troglodytic moron.

Spoken like a true brainwashed liberal who does not know anything at all
unless it be politically correct. Unfortunately for him, being politically
correct has absolutely nothing to do with scientific truth - or most any
other kind of truth either for that matter.

Gary needs to answer the question of why there are so many homos when we
know nature would never create so many. Must be nurture, don't you think?
And finally, do you approve or disapprove. If you disapprove, what do you
propose to do about it? As you see, the questions just go on and on.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"GaryG" wrote in message
...
"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
news:XLGdncB2rJwARp7ZnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@prairiewave. com...
NYC XYZ wrote:
[...]

Anyway, I'll take one of these fine young latinitasses here any
time...more tits and ass than two typical white girls put together!

Just a couple of assholes who are into ass and tits, ass and tits, ass
and
tits ... nothing but ass and tits.

LOL...we should all be like you...feeling ashamed of sexuality, afraid of
being a "sinner", and desperately trying to be a "real man".

Are you sure you're not still in the closet?

Oh for Christ's sakes Gary, I spent 4 long years in the Navy and listened to
this kind of **** all day long and well into the night. I got so g.d. sick
of it that I resolved I was not going to bother with crap like that ever
again.

I would like to know the ages of everyone who is engaged in this thread. I
think NYC is young and is therefore an idiot. I do not know about the rest
of you. You are just coming across as astoundingly stupid.

There is absolutely nothing you can tell me about sex that I don't already
know in spades. But to blather about it in a public forum marks you as
beyond stupid. Like I said, I will make some allowances for the young
because their brains are not fully formed, but what is your excuse.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota


They should get their own separate
newsgroup where they could discuss this subject endlessly without
embarrassing the rest of us. They could name their newsgroup
alt.rec.assandtits. There are several other scum bags I know of on ARBR
who
would be delighted to become members of such a group.

Edward Dolan wrote:
"GaryG" wrote in message
...

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
news

[...]


The evolutionary process makes all kinds of mistakes Ever hear of

mutations?

Some few are helpful, but most are harmful. It is society that will make
a
place for gays, not nature. Nature will see to it that natural selection
will eliminate any mistakes that do not promote the survival of the

species.

Anyone who thinks that homos were put here by nature to protect siblings

has

got rocks in their heads for brains.

Given that the world population of humans just passed the 6.5 billion
mark,
I don't think the "preservation of the species" argument holds water when
it
comes to the prevalence of homosexuals. In fact, it may be that an
increasing incidence of homosexuals may be just what we need to prevent
drowning in our own filth through over-procreation.


But that will be a decision that will be made by society, not by evolution.
Our evolution is set and it cannot be changed unless we get into the genes
and change them by manipulating them biologically. Since we know that men
are 95% hetero, do you want to live in a world where many of these men will
be encouraged to turn homo to prevent even more births? I think not!


Society is inherently incapable of making any sound decision for the
good of the entire planet. It will take a backlash by the planet itself
to restore the balance, whether it is a super plague, global warming to
the point of catastrophe, or triggering another ice age, it will happen,
but when is the big question.


By the way, I continue to believe that 95% of homos are nothing but
perverts. They have freely chosen their life style for immoral reasons of
their own. Nature would never create so many homos. It is strictly a
societal construct and the amount of it that is tolerated is an indicator

of

the moral decay of a society.

Spoken like a troglodytic moron.


Spoken like a true brainwashed liberal who does not know anything at all
unless it be politically correct. Unfortunately for him, being politically
correct has absolutely nothing to do with scientific truth - or most any
other kind of truth either for that matter.

Gary needs to answer the question of why there are so many homos when we
know nature would never create so many. Must be nurture, don't you think?
And finally, do you approve or disapprove. If you disapprove, what do you
propose to do about it? As you see, the questions just go on and on.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota




Get off the damned home fixation. They are but a few abberations.
Bill

NYC XYZ wrote:

Ack! Is there no escape from the middle-aged fatty???

You mean FOG's(Fat Old Guys)?

That's mostly an american problem. Go to Europe and you'll find a
considerable number of younger, well trained riders on recumbents. Women
are still the vast minority, though.


We really need more women in this hobby. How can we make 'bents sexy?

I see no logic connection between your statement and your question. You
won't get women on recumbents by making 'bents "sexy" in the sense of:
"semi-naked models posing on recumbents". That's a male fantasy, women
tend to think more practically: How much does it cost? Will it fit me?
What can I do with it?...


I already know the chicks will love the safety and comfort of a CLWB
like the HP Velotechnik Spirit, which is why I'm ordering that in the
summer as a guest bike. But we really need to get away from this
balding areospace engineer image, fellas.

Chicks may love the safety and the comfort, but most of them don't like
the sensation they attract when riding a recumbent. So it comes down to
the old chicken-egg problem: As long as recumbents are rare, hardly
anyone is willing to take the plunge, as soon as they are mainstream,
everyone will ride them. Problem is how to make recumbents more popular.

Lower the price(not the pants) and make them easily available, show
celebrities riding them, but in the first line: ride it yourself. In my
eyes that's the first and most important promotion for recumbents.


Don't any of y'all have daughters you'd be willing to sacrifice?

Speaking of daughters, I find it interesting that KMX-Karts dedicates a
page especially to girls:

http://www.kmxkarts.co.uk/jodiespage.html



And now please stop this talking about beach beauties and micro bikinis,
we had 10 inches of new snow this morning again. ;-)

Which reminds me...them Scandanavian girls have this custom of rushing
out of the sauna right into the snow all naked...sehr erholsung....

Well, lying naked in the snow certainly is a very special form of beeing
"recumbent". ;-)

Kurt

"Bill Baka" wrote in message
. com...
Edward Dolan wrote:

"GaryG" wrote in message
...
[...]

Given that the world population of humans just passed the 6.5 billion
mark,
I don't think the "preservation of the species" argument holds water when
it
comes to the prevalence of homosexuals. In fact, it may be that an
increasing incidence of homosexuals may be just what we need to prevent
drowning in our own filth through over-procreation.


But that will be a decision that will be made by society, not by
evolution. Our evolution is set and it cannot be changed unless we get
into the genes and change them by manipulating them biologically. Since
we know that men are 95% hetero, do you want to live in a world where
many of these men will be encouraged to turn homo to prevent even more
births? I think not!


Society is inherently incapable of making any sound decision for the good
of the entire planet. It will take a backlash by the planet itself to
restore the balance, whether it is a super plague, global warming to the
point of catastrophe, or triggering another ice age, it will happen, but
when is the big question.

The planet is only able to support our vast numbers because of the
technology that makes it all possible. If and when that technology ever
fails, then the great crash will come as you suggest.
[...]

Get off the damned home [homo] fixation. They are but a few aberrations.

You and I agree on that, but liberals like Gary and NYC don't. They would
create a culture which would permit it if not encourage it because they
believe homos are born and not made. I believe just the opposite. My main
mission here on ARBR is to take liberals to task on all their idiotic
beliefs. Yes, it is nasty business but some one has got to do it.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Bill Baka" wrote in message
. net...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Bill Baka" wrote in message
. com...

NYC XYZ wrote:
[...]
Anyway, I'll take one of these fine young latinitasses here any
time...more tits and ass than two typical white girls put together!


Just a couple of assholes who are into ass and tits, ass and tits, ass
and tits ... nothing but ass and tits. They should get their own separate
newsgroup where they could discuss this subject endlessly without
embarrassing the rest of us. They could name their newsgroup
alt.rec.assandtits. There are several other scum bags I know of on ARBR
who would be delighted to become members of such a group.

I am definitely not just into tits and ass, there must also be a brain to
be of interest, and I find women with small breasts to be much more fun
under the sheets, like they are trying to compensate, not that they need
to.

I am put off by men who go on and on about women. In a well ordered world, a
man would only really be able to talk about a very few women and finally
just one woman, his wife. But I recognize it is just all talk anyway.

The main mission of women is to constrain men and they do an excellent job
of it to all except for those few men who turn out to be monsters. It may be
that NYC is just such a monster. If you are going from one woman to the next
based on her bust size, then you are a monster too.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Bill Baka" wrote in message
. com...

Edward Dolan wrote:


"GaryG" wrote in message
...

[...]


Given that the world population of humans just passed the 6.5 billion
mark,
I don't think the "preservation of the species" argument holds water when
it
comes to the prevalence of homosexuals. In fact, it may be that an
increasing incidence of homosexuals may be just what we need to prevent
drowning in our own filth through over-procreation.


But that will be a decision that will be made by society, not by
evolution. Our evolution is set and it cannot be changed unless we get
into the genes and change them by manipulating them biologically. Since
we know that men are 95% hetero, do you want to live in a world where
many of these men will be encouraged to turn homo to prevent even more
births? I think not!


Society is inherently incapable of making any sound decision for the good
of the entire planet. It will take a backlash by the planet itself to
restore the balance, whether it is a super plague, global warming to the
point of catastrophe, or triggering another ice age, it will happen, but
when is the big question.


The planet is only able to support our vast numbers because of the
technology that makes it all possible. If and when that technology ever
fails, then the great crash will come as you suggest.
[...]

It will. do you really think that even 0.001% of those people depending
on technology to 'enhance' their lives would ever be able to comprehend
what is in those boxes, much less fix one, even if their life depended
on it. Even a GPS failing on an unmapped remote hiking trip could be
fatal. They probably wouldn't even have a simple magnetic compass.


Get off the damned home [homo] fixation. They are but a few aberrations.


You and I agree on that, but liberals like Gary and NYC don't. They would
create a culture which would permit it if not encourage it because they
believe homos are born and not made. I believe just the opposite. My main
mission here on ARBR is to take liberals to task on all their idiotic
beliefs. Yes, it is nasty business but some one has got to do it.

I am with you on that too. Homos may be not quite natural, but in some
way they are helping with the population problem by not procreating.
When we reach 10 billion and the planet is tapped out then people may
wise up, a little too late, but....
Bill

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Bill Baka" wrote in message
. com...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]

Bill Baka wrote:

Society is inherently incapable of making any sound decision for the good
of the entire planet. It will take a backlash by the planet itself to
restore the balance, whether it is a super plague, global warming to the
point of catastrophe, or triggering another ice age, it will happen, but
when is the big question.


The planet is only able to support our vast numbers because of the
technology that makes it all possible. If and when that technology ever
fails, then the great crash will come as you suggest.
[...]

It will. do you really think that even 0.001% of those people depending on
technology to 'enhance' their lives would ever be able to comprehend what
is in those boxes, much less fix one, even if their life depended on it.
Even a GPS failing on an unmapped remote hiking trip could be fatal. They
probably wouldn't even have a simple magnetic compass.

Yup, we are all at the mercy of our technology. But nonetheless society has
made a tremendous investment in the technology which sustains us. We will
see the unraveling of societies first in the third world where they do
nothing but feed off of us. I do not believe that Western societies can
sustain in the long run the degree of complexity that is necessary to keep
things going at the present level. We will have to revert to a more
primitive life style eventually.

The average man is as stupid and as ignorant as a cave man ever was. We are
totally depend on an educated elite to keep things going. That is why I
respect Mr. Sherman even though he is a dunderheaded liberal. He is a civil
engineer and does the kind of work which most of could never do. It is folks
like him which make our society possible. I urge him to hang in there for
the sake of us all.

Bill, I like to contemplate the computer and the Internet. It is all so far
beyond me that I do not know where to begin. All of this was invented by
geniuses and all we know how to do is turn the damn thing on and click the
mouse. I am afraid of my own ignorance. To tell you the truth, the
technology of my society completely bamboozles me and intimidates me.

I would like to have been a Renaissance Man who would have known everything
there was to know. That is clearly impossible now for everyone. We have all
become specialists whether we wanted to or not.

My father use to take the Encyclopedia Britannica to bed with him every
night and read various articles in it. He plowed through the whole damn
thing. This was the 1911 onion paper edition which was the scholar's
edition. He was trying to know everything there was to know up to that time.
Such naiveté is now beyond us all. I despair of ever knowing much at all.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Kurt Fischer" wrote in message
...
NYC XYZ wrote:
[...]
We really need more women in this hobby. How can we make 'bents sexy?

I see no logic connection between your statement and your question. You
won't get women on recumbents by making 'bents "sexy" in the sense of:
"semi-naked models posing on recumbents". That's a male fantasy, women
tend to think more practically: How much does it cost? Will it fit me?
What can I do with it?...

Amen to that male fantasy bit! I truly do not think men are capable of
understanding women at all. Fortunately for us, women do understand us men
much better.

I already know the chicks will love the safety and comfort of a CLWB
like the HP Velotechnik Spirit, which is why I'm ordering that in the
summer as a guest bike. But we really need to get away from this
balding areospace engineer image, fellas.

Chicks may love the safety and the comfort, but most of them don't like
the sensation they attract when riding a recumbent. So it comes down to
the old chicken-egg problem: As long as recumbents are rare, hardly
anyone is willing to take the plunge, as soon as they are mainstream,
everyone will ride them. Problem is how to make recumbents more popular.

Lower the price(not the pants) and make them easily available, show
celebrities riding them, but in the first line: ride it yourself. In my
eyes that's the first and most important promotion for recumbents.
[...]

It is always a pleasure to read Kurt Fischer of Germany. He is just so
sensible and reasonable. He restores my faith in humanity after having to
put up with so many idiots here on ARBR.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota