tonyhays

You'd think so, but I'm not overly optimistic. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

One is pure evil, the other is a hypocritical bigot trying to force her religion down other peoples throats. Know what both situations have in common? The people involved think they are doing god's will. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Yet her lies will be spread as truth to further the planned parenthood witch hunt. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Well, one could hope. Maybe once someone gets the nomination they will stop pandering to the evangelical fringe and start talking about issues that really matter. Ha! Couldn't even type that with a straight face. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

The petition has been there for 3 days on a nationally known website and she has gathered 276 supporters. Out of a nation with 318,900,000 people. I'm betting she won't even hit a 1000. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

So was there any talk of fiscal responsibility, a balanced budget, reduced spending...you know, things conservatives should be talking about. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

And being fired by a DZO could mean a myriad of things. Could be for a valid reason, could be work place politics, could be as simple as refusing to jump in shit conditions. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Please correlate with actual events. Not broad generalisations, but actual, specific events. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Here's the theme song she should have walked out too.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0doSWS0Fj24 “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

The TV show "The Project" here in Oz mentioned Kim Davis and using that song and how inappropriate it was. Something along the lines of "What are we getting fired up for, homophobia???" “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Holy agreement batman! We agree on something! “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Your meme is 'exhibit A' for why people consider the republican party "out-of-touch". “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

You love putting words in other people's mouths don't you! “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

So...you can't prove it. The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. The only thing that's been proven is that the supposed non-edited videos have, in fact, been edited. Clearly for political gain. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

First Ken Ham and the creation museum, and now Kim Davis. Embarrassed indeed. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Why? 'Cause it continuously exposes the ridiculous bigoted right wing chain-emails as fakes? “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Probably more evidence this is fabricated bullshit “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Crickets in here since that was posted...... “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/american-abortion-rate-decline/395960/ Your side of the abortion debate should be celebrating. This whole PP video nonsense smells like republican propaganda to me. Nothing like reviving an emotional debate to mobilise your voting base. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

With no dissent. Yet another loss for the bigots. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

So the multitude of social media sites where near misses/tragedies may or may not be uploaded and then may or may not be watched by skydivers, let alone TI's, is considered a reporting system??? Yes, with the advent of small cameras the amount of skydiving videos out there is growing constantly. Sifting through all of them to find ones with the near misses that we'd like to see(for example a student wearing a wrist mount camera that reaches back and releases the reserve handle) is the proverbial needle in a haystack. Perhaps I should rephrase my mantra for ya...Until a mandatory, reliable, and central reporting system is put in place and disseminated to the instructors & examiners, the likelihood of learning from near misses and tragic events is potentially severely diminished. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Unfortunately there is no way to verify the near misses until either 1) something tragic happens that involves a student wearing his own camera or 2) some sort of mandatory reporting system is put in place for all incidents, not just the major ones. And even if scenario #1 happens, we may never know the cause til way down the line due to tight lipped litigation fearing DZO's and Ti's. Surprising sentiment coming from the manager of a business I bet a bunch of people thought putting on the Y-mod was a great big 'yawn' too, until the grandma video surfaced and the FAA was less than impressed with our performance and the mod became mandatory. How bout we ask the experts since opinion is divided. Both Bill Booth and Tom Noonan are on this website, what do you guys think? “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

What??? Uncertain about being raptured??? [vader]I find your lack of faith disturbing[/vader] “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

So what's so bs about her post? I've never understood the "armed society is a polite society" mentality. The only place where everyone is armed is in a war zone, not exactly noted for its safety. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

My opinion was in regards to a tandem passenger wearing the camera. I have zero problem with a instructor wearing one as long as they have the proper experience. Major accidents that involve serious injury or death get public scrutiny. And even when that happens DZ's are under no obligation to send any detailed report into the USPA for review or investigation. How often do small incidents get reported? Say for example, on opening a student reaches back and grabs ahold of the reserve handle and pulls it just enough to dislodge it? Those types of incidents? I bet never. So not much public scrutiny there. Maybe that's because the number of times that a student is wearing one is extremely rare and properly trained instructors are doing the filming. There's more issues to wearing a camera than just a snag hazard. Like I said in my prior post(the part you conveniently left out), how do you feel about substandard footage going out and promoting your business? And aren't tandem passengers considered STUDENTS? Name one student progression program that requires the student to be flying camera. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”