Air sickness

[Amine]

Does motion sickness fade away with experience? How many of you
seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
(Assuming of course an otherwise good health.)

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Amine > wrote:

> Does motion sickness fade away with experience? How many of you
> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
> (Assuming of course an otherwise good health.)

Yes. Motion sickness effects can diminish with exposure and experience.
Not everyone gets over it and different people have better luck than others.

btw - this subject has been discussed in the past, you might want to search the
usenet archive for "Motion sickness" or similar subject lines.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Vaughn Simon]

"Amine" > wrote in message
...
> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?
As a CFI and an ex-Navy guy, I can confidently tell you that motion
sickness almost always dimishes (or disappears entirely) with continued exposure
to the conditions that initially trigger it.

> How many of you
> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?

The element of control is a huge issue with motion sickness. If you are the
pilot and you are manuvering the plane, your brain knows what is going to
happen, so motion sickness is much less likely to happen. Several experienced
pilots have told me that the only time they feel motion sickness is when they
are a passenger.

Vaughn

[Mxsmanic]

Amine writes:

> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?

Motion sickness caused by a specific situation tends to fade when that
situation is regularly and frequently experienced. It may still occur in
other situations, and the resistance to motion sickness even in the target
situation will fade if the situation is not encountered fairly frequently.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Mon, 26 May 2008 11:58:26 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
> wrote:

>
>"Amine" > wrote in message
...
>> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?
> As a CFI and an ex-Navy guy, I can confidently tell you that motion
>sickness almost always dimishes (or disappears entirely) with continued exposure
>to the conditions that initially trigger it.
>
>> How many of you
>> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
>
> The element of control is a huge issue with motion sickness. If you are the
>pilot and you are manuvering the plane, your brain knows what is going to
>happen, so motion sickness is much less likely to happen. Several experienced
>pilots have told me that the only time they feel motion sickness is when they
>are a passenger.
>
>Vaughn
>

truely, the easiest way to calm a passenger's airsickness is to place
cool fresh air on their face and have them fly the aeroplane.
of course in aeroplanes you own you can do that.
commercial aircraft just provide barff bags.

the australian airforce, I'm told, have one of those spinning
centrifuge seats and airsick trainees get to sit in it for periods for
a fair drubbing to get them insensitive.

Stealth Pilot

[R. Gardner]

Yes it will fade possibbly and as mentioned the control of the airplane will
help.

Don't eat heavy before flying, keep cool air on you. Don't look at the
ground below you! The fast motion your eye see confusses the brain because
it senses that you are not realy moving. Look at a distant horizon to help
ease the on set of motion sickness. That helps the brain think that what it
sees is what it also senses with motion.
"Amine" > wrote in message
...
> Does motion sickness fade away with experience? How many of you
> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
> (Assuming of course an otherwise good health.)

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Mon, 26 May 2008 14:52:50 +0200, Mxsmanic >
wrote:

>Amine writes:
>
>> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?
>
>Motion sickness caused by a specific situation tends to fade when that
>situation is regularly and frequently experienced. It may still occur in
>other situations, and the resistance to motion sickness even in the target
>situation will fade if the situation is not encountered fairly frequently.

what *causes* motion sickness oh wise one?

[Frank Olson]

R. Gardner wrote:
> Yes it will fade possibbly

"Yes it will fade possibly"? Isn't that like a double negative?? :-)


> and as mentioned the control of the airplane will
> help.
>
> Don't eat heavy before flying, keep cool air on you. Don't look at the
> ground below you! The fast motion your eye see confusses the brain because
> it senses that you are not realy moving. Look at a distant horizon to help
> ease the on set of motion sickness. That helps the brain think that what it
> sees is what it also senses with motion.

Actually, my wife get's sick driving in the car on the *way* to the
airport. I think it's the "anticipation". :-)

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Amine writes:
>
>> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?
>
> Motion sickness caused by a specific situation tends to fade when that
> situation is regularly and frequently experienced. It may still occur
> in other situations, and the resistance to motion sickness even in the
> target situation will fade if the situation is not encountered fairly
> frequently.
>

Oh god he's back to medicine again.


Bertie

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
...
<...>
> the australian airforce, I'm told, have one of those spinning
> centrifuge seats and airsick trainees get to sit in it for periods for
> a fair drubbing to get them insensitive.
>

Bob Hoover claims that he taught himself aerobatics to get over motion
sickness.

Note: I am not suggesting that one should teach oneself aerobatics. Yes, Bob
Hoover did it, but he is Bob Hoover and you and I aren't - not by a long
shot.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Cubdriver]

On Mon, 26 May 2008 09:55:35 -0400, "R. Gardner"
> wrote:

>Yes it will fade possibbly and as mentioned the control of the airplane will
>help.

My daughter the sailor claims that getting up on deck and working like
a navvy is a sure cure/preventive, but I have not found this to be the
case.

I've never been airsick (though I came close to it when doing spin
training at Chandler AZ, on repeated hot days, and driving past the
stockyards) but I have indeed been seasick. My preventive measures
include sitting very still, on deck but as low as I can get (the
nearer the center of gravity, the less the motion), looking at the
horizon, and nibbling Saltines or better yet sugared ginger.

Ginger is a definite preventive for nasuea (however spelled!). Years
ago my old ma used to feed us flat, room-temp ginger ale if we were
sick. We're talking 1940s here, not folk medicine perhaps but close to
it. I feed the same stuff to my grand-daughters--i.e., her
great-granddaughters. For myself, however, I prefer the ginger
candies. Available I think in most groceries.

(Once actively sick, however, there is no cure. Just lie down with
your head in a bucket and wait for death,)



Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Viperdoc" > wrote:

> Anthony, reading about something or looking it up does not equate with
> knowledge or experience, just as in flying or medicine.

For sure and for certain reading about seasickness did not truly educate
me about the two stages of seasickness... No amount of reading could
have prepared me for being sick when deep sea fishing.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Cubdriver wrote:
> My daughter the sailor claims that getting up on deck and working like
> a navvy is a sure cure/preventive, but I have not found this to be the
> case.


I've never been either seasick or airsick, although I've turned a shade of green
before in both situations. In the case of flying, I was sitting in the back of
an Arrow on a warm bumpy day. I've never had a problem while in personal
control of an aircraft.


> I've never been airsick (though I came close to it when doing spin
> training at Chandler AZ, on repeated hot days, and driving past the
> stockyards) but I have indeed been seasick. My preventive measures
> include sitting very still, on deck but as low as I can get (the
> nearer the center of gravity, the less the motion), looking at the
> horizon, and nibbling Saltines or better yet sugared ginger.


Ginger is a natural anti-emetic and does work. My personal rules for rough seas
include never going below if at all possible; never go out on the water with a
full stomach; never going out on the water on an empty stomach; staying away
from the engine exhaust; always be out in the wind... even if it means riding
the top of a flying bridge in 12 foot seas. Never look down. Never look up.
And if others are heaving, always stay to windward. Remember, puking is like
yawning. If one person does it, everybody wants to.

If you're going to take Marezine or whatever, don't wait until you're queazy
before you do. I start the meds the night before if I'm going out on the water.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Christopher Brian Colohan]

"R. Gardner" > writes:
> Don't look at the
> ground below you! The fast motion your eye see confusses the brain because
> it senses that you are not realy moving. Look at a distant horizon to help
> ease the on set of motion sickness. That helps the brain think that what it
> sees is what it also senses with motion.

Heh. The one time I got really air sick during my flight training was
when I started to learn turns around a point. Constantly looking at
the ground pretty close to me, while going around and around and
around... :-)

Chris

[romeomike]

Vaughn Simon wrote:
Several experienced
> pilots have told me that the only time they feel motion sickness is when they
> are a passenger.

Particularly if that passenger is in the back seat and/or the pilot
doesn't maintain coordinated flight.

[Mike Gilmour[_2_]]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Viperdoc" > wrote:
>
>> Anthony, reading about something or looking it up does not equate with
>> knowledge or experience, just as in flying or medicine.
>
> For sure and for certain reading about seasickness did not truly educate
> me about the two stages of seasickness... No amount of reading could
> have prepared me for being sick when deep sea fishing.
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>

From my experience as 23 year in the Merchant Navy is that most people who
initially suffer from sea sickness get over it fairly early on into their
sea going career. Other than that rough sea experience just causes tiredness
due muscle fatique from continually bracing/ correcting your balance.

Mike

[Mike Gilmour[_2_]]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Viperdoc" > wrote:
>
>> Anthony, reading about something or looking it up does not equate with
>> knowledge or experience, just as in flying or medicine.
>
> For sure and for certain reading about seasickness did not truly educate
> me about the two stages of seasickness... No amount of reading could
> have prepared me for being sick when deep sea fishing.
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>

From my experience as 23 year in the Merchant Navy is that most people who
initially suffer from sea sickness get over it fairly early on into their
sea going career. Other than that rough sea experience just causes tiredness
due muscle fatique from continually bracing/ correcting your balance.

Mike

[Vaughn Simon]

"Cubdriver" <usenet AT danford DOT net> wrote in message
...

>
> My daughter the sailor claims that getting up on deck and working like
> a navvy is a sure cure/preventive, but I have not found this to be the
> case.
>
Getting up on deck has always worked for me. Unfortunately, much of my Navy
time was spent on board submarines where that was not an option.

Vaughn

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Vaughn Simon wrote:
>> My daughter the sailor claims that getting up on deck and working like
>> a navvy is a sure cure/preventive, but I have not found this to be the
>> case.
>>
> Getting up on deck has always worked for me. Unfortunately, much of my Navy
> time was spent on board submarines where that was not an option.


But it also shouldn't have been a problem. From my diving days, I know that the
roughest sea calms down fairly close to the surface. Many a seasick diver
settled his stomach by getting off the surface.

With nuclear submarines being the norm, why travel at the surface in a rough
sea?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Christopher Brian Colohan wrote:
> Heh. The one time I got really air sick during my flight training was
> when I started to learn turns around a point. Constantly looking at
> the ground pretty close to me, while going around and around and
> around... :-)


I took some foresters up to survey their property in rough air on several
occasions. If you think it was rough on you, at least you were the one in
control. Imagine where somebody else is doing the flying and you're circling
the ground looking through binoculars. It was reminiscent of the WWII AAC
officer's uniform: pinks and greens. They started one color and ended the
other. <G>



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Tina]

On May 26, 10:48 am, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m> wrote:
> "Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> <...>
>
> > the australian airforce, I'm told, have one of those spinning
> > centrifuge seats and airsick trainees get to sit in it for periods for
> > a fair drubbing to get them insensitive.
>
> Bob Hoover claims that he taught himself aerobatics to get over motion
> sickness.
>
> Note: I am not suggesting that one should teach oneself aerobatics. Yes, Bob
> Hoover did it, but he is Bob Hoover and you and I aren't - not by a long
> shot.

You know, I had seen films of Hoover's cockpit, with glasses of water
not spilling while he did loops and the like. That guy's internal
gyros allowed him to keep the local g forces straight into the seat,
and that is not the way to overcome motion sickness tendencies. Now if
he flew with me at the controls, well, bring along enough zip lock
bags. And that's what I call straight and level!

I don't get sick in airplanes, but did at the most unexpected time
when sailing singlehanded across the Long Island Sound. the odd thing
was, I was busy, fully occupied, in fresh air, and boom. Once was
enough: I was afraid I was going to live.

[Vaughn Simon]

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
...
>
> With nuclear submarines being the norm, why travel at the surface in a rough
> sea?

Good question! Operating out of Scotland, we had to travel several hours to
and from port on the surface. Our schedule was "locked in stone" so we could
not wait for nice weather. Sometimes it was months between those few hours of
hell, so I never had a chance to really get acclimated to the motion.
Submerged, we sometimes took surprisingly large rolls, but had little pitching
motion. One tactic back then was to follow storms for as long as possible to
avoid detection, so we were sometimes taking those rolls for a week or more at a
time. That motion I found inconvenient, but it never made me sick.

Vaughn

[Tina]

On May 26, 2:52 pm, "Vaughn Simon" >
wrote:
> "Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:j8mdnZOyPaS4ZqfVnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@gigan ews.com...
>
>
>
> > With nuclear submarines being the norm, why travel at the surface in a rough
> > sea?
>
> Good question! Operating out of Scotland, we had to travel several hours to
> and from port on the surface. Our schedule was "locked in stone" so we could
> not wait for nice weather. Sometimes it was months between those few hours of
> hell, so I never had a chance to really get acclimated to the motion.
> Submerged, we sometimes took surprisingly large rolls, but had little pitching
> motion. One tactic back then was to follow storms for as long as possible to
> avoid detection, so we were sometimes taking those rolls for a week or more at a
> time. That motion I found inconvenient, but it never made me sick.
>
> Vaughn

Vaughn, for sure you were not anywhere near hull limits deep so maybe
this information is not classified. Do you know at what depth you were
still experiencing rolls of a significant amplitude? I'd have guessed
in deep water unless the boat was on the edge of a current it would be
pretty stable if deeper than 10 or 20 times the height of the surface
waves.

[muff528]

"Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 26 May 2008 14:52:50 +0200, Mxsmanic >
> wrote:
>
>>Amine writes:
>>
>>> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?
>>
>>Motion sickness caused by a specific situation tends to fade when that
>>situation is regularly and frequently experienced. It may still occur in
>>other situations, and the resistance to motion sickness even in the target
>>situation will fade if the situation is not encountered fairly frequently.
>
> what *causes* motion sickness oh wise one?

Me! Me! ....call on me! I've got my hand up!
My guess, just off the top of my head, would be ........... motion!
But it's probably more complicated than that.......prolly some math or
something involved. :-)

TP

[NW_Pilot]

"Amine" > wrote in message
...
> Does motion sickness fade away with experience? How many of you
> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
> (Assuming of course an otherwise good health.)


Whats motion sickness? I forgot hahahahahaha....

[NW_Pilot]

>
> the australian airforce, I'm told, have one of those spinning
> centrifuge seats and airsick trainees get to sit in it for periods for
> a fair drubbing to get them insensitive.
>
> Stealth Pilot
>

In the US we call them roller coaster and carnivals.

[Vaughn Simon]

"Tina" > wrote in message
...
>
> Vaughn, for sure you were not anywhere near hull limits deep so maybe
> this information is not classified. Do you know at what depth you were
> still experiencing rolls of a significant amplitude? I'd have guessed
> in deep water unless the boat was on the edge of a current it would be
> pretty stable if deeper than 10 or 20 times the height of the surface
> waves.

That was a long time ago, so I don't remember specific depths. I think our
typical cruising depth was just a couple hundred feet. (not giving anything
away, that class of subs is long scrapped and probably exists in the form of
razor blades and Toyotas.)

Vaughn

[Dave[_5_]]

> I've never been either seasick or airsick, although I've turned a shade of green
> before in both situations. *In the case of flying, I was sitting in the back of
> an Arrow on a warm bumpy day. *I've never had a problem while in personal
> control of an aircraft.
>
> > I've never been airsick (though I came close to it when doing spin
> > training at Chandler AZ, on repeated hot days, and driving past the
> > stockyards) but I have indeed been seasick. My preventive measures
> > include sitting very still, on deck but as low as I can get (the
> > nearer the center of gravity, the less the motion), looking at the
> > horizon, and nibbling Saltines or better yet sugared ginger.

I've had similar experiences. Got a little green while a student
pilot, and again when taking aerobatic training - but never lost my
lunch. It helps to be flying the plane.

I've likewise never been seasick, despite working some 14 years at sea
- including going through a couple of typhoons. You'd know it was
rough when hardly anyone
else showed up for meals. One time I came close on a crew boat in
rough weather with the wind blowing diesel smoke into the cabin. The
cure was to stand in the
center of the deck with the wind in my face and my eyes on the
horizon.

Dave

[Peter Dohm]

>
> the australian airforce, I'm told, have one of those spinning
> centrifuge seats and airsick trainees get to sit in it for periods for
> a fair drubbing to get them insensitive.
>
> Stealth Pilot
>
I have suspected that those work quite well after several sessions, but that
first session will leave you qaueasy for the rest of the day!!!

I only know because, long after I had effectively cured my tendency to
airsickness in real airplanes, I saw one of those infernal contraptions at a
fair. Supposedly, they were also used for astronaut training, and that
tenpted me beyond my meager restraint...

I'm still curious whether it really works as well as advertised, but I'd
have to be sure it would remain available continuously and on demand for a
couple of weeks. So it seems like I'm pretty safe. :-)

Peter

[Peter Dohm]

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
...
> Christopher Brian Colohan wrote:
>> Heh. The one time I got really air sick during my flight training was
>> when I started to learn turns around a point. Constantly looking at
>> the ground pretty close to me, while going around and around and
>> around... :-)
>
>
> I took some foresters up to survey their property in rough air on several
> occasions. If you think it was rough on you, at least you were the one in
> control. Imagine where somebody else is doing the flying and you're
> circling the ground looking through binoculars. It was reminiscent of the
> WWII AAC officer's uniform: pinks and greens. They started one color and
> ended the other. <G>
>
>
>
> --
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN
> mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
>
Just the thought of the binoculars...

Peter

[Mxsmanic]

Stealth Pilot writes:

> what *causes* motion sickness oh wise one?

The exact mechanism is still unclear, especially for motion sickness induced
by stimuli other than motion, such as moving pictures.

[Robert Barker]

"Amine" > wrote in message
...
> Does motion sickness fade away with experience? How many of you
> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
> (Assuming of course an otherwise good health.)

Had a guy in our club learning to fly. He had over 70 hours and had to
quit. Got sick every time he flew. He started again after being off for a
year. Ate a large spoon of creamy peanut butter about half an hour before
he flew and never had another problem. He just passed his checkride last
Tuesday and doesn't need the peanut butter any more!

[Mxsmanic]

Viperdoc writes:

> Anthony, reading about something or looking it up does not equate with
> knowledge or experience, just as in flying or medicine.

Then why do doctors do so much reading?

[Viperdoc]

>
> The exact mechanism is still unclear, especially for motion sickness
> induced
> by stimuli other than motion, such as moving pictures.

The exact mechanism is unclear to you, Anthony, because you don't know what
you're talking about, as usual.

[Viperdoc]

>
> Then why do doctors do so much reading?

Because it's knowledge along with experience that brings expertise, not
reading alone.

[Aluckyguess]

Just put a lolopop in your mouth. You cant get sick while sucking on a
lolipop.
Try it. You can thank me later.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Mon, 26 May 2008 20:00:49 GMT, "muff528" >
wrote:

>
>"Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 14:52:50 +0200, Mxsmanic >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Amine writes:
>>>
>>>> Does motion sickness fade away with experience?
>>>
>>>Motion sickness caused by a specific situation tends to fade when that
>>>situation is regularly and frequently experienced. It may still occur in
>>>other situations, and the resistance to motion sickness even in the target
>>>situation will fade if the situation is not encountered fairly frequently.
>>
>> what *causes* motion sickness oh wise one?
>
>Me! Me! ....call on me! I've got my hand up!
>My guess, just off the top of my head, would be ........... motion!
>But it's probably more complicated than that.......prolly some math or
>something involved. :-)
>
>TP
>

as far as I am aware the current medical thinking is that the symptoms
of (food) poisoning cause a difference between the somatogravic system
(balance in the inner ears) and the positional appreciation in the
mind from visual cues. we have evolved so that when this occurs we
heave up the stomach contents to remove from the body the source of
the poisoning.
unfortunately gyrations in an aircraft can cause differences between
the visual appreciation of position and the messages our inner ears
are giving us and this triggers the same primitive reflex.

the upside of all this is that the typical 2 litre ice cream container
holds a little more than the vomit volume and has a sealable lid.
carry one in your aircraft :-)

see MX, you didnt have a clue.

Stealth Pilot

[Mxsmanic]

Viperdoc writes:

> The exact mechanism is unclear to you, Anthony, because you don't know what
> you're talking about, as usual.

The exact mechanism is unclear to everyone.

However, if the mechanism is clear to you, why don't you explain it? That
would be far more productive than trying to discredit me.

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
...
<...>
> the upside of all this is that the typical 2 litre ice cream container
> holds a little more than the vomit volume and has a sealable lid.
> carry one in your aircraft :-)
>

Oh, yea, I forgot to mention. DO NOT stick your head out the window if you
are going to ralph. That is a real bad idea. A hat, chart, or even the floor
are better places than out the window.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[gatt[_4_]]

Viperdoc wrote:
>> The exact mechanism is unclear to everyone.
>>
>> However, if the mechanism is clear to you, why don't you explain it? That
>> would be far more productive than trying to discredit me.
>
> You're simply not worth the effort.

(and already discredited.)

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Viperdoc writes:
>
>> The exact mechanism is unclear to you, Anthony, because you don't
>> know what you're talking about, as usual.
>
> The exact mechanism is unclear to everyone.
>
> However, if the mechanism is clear to you, why don't you explain it?
> That would be far more productive than trying to discredit me.

Why should Viperdoc waste his time? You're too ****ing stupid to
understand any explanation. You don't know **** from shinola and never
will.

[Tina]

Discredit?

There might be an implication that there is a credit remaining in his
account, Viper. Will all who think so send their contributions
directly to the Mx rehab fund?






That suggests On May 27, 5:12 pm, "Viperdoc"
> wrote:
> > The exact mechanism is unclear to everyone.
>
> > However, if the mechanism is clear to you, why don't you explain it? That
> > would be far more productive than trying to discredit me.
>
> You're simply not worth the effort.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Viperdoc writes:
>
>> The exact mechanism is unclear to you, Anthony, because you don't
>> know what you're talking about, as usual.
>
> The exact mechanism is unclear to everyone.
>
> However, if the mechanism is clear to you, why don't you explain it?
> That would be far more productive than trying to discredit me.
>

Like you ever had any credit.



Bertie

[Robert M. Gary]

On May 26, 2:41*am, Amine > wrote:
> Does motion sickness fade away with experience? How many of you
> seasoned pilots had/still have serious issues with recurrent nausea?
> (Assuming of course an otherwise good health.)

Yes. When I was a student pilot I got sick all the time and was really
really scared I couldn't fly as a result of my air sickness. I no
longer have any air sickness and I cross the Sierras all the time now.

-Robert

[K l e i n[_2_]]

On May 27, 2:10 pm, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m> wrote:
> "Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> <...>
>
> > the upside of all this is that the typical 2 litre ice cream container
> > holds a little more than the vomit volume and has a sealable lid.
> > carry one in your aircraft :-)
>
> Oh, yea, I forgot to mention. DO NOT stick your head out the window if you
> are going to ralph. That is a real bad idea. A hat, chart, or even the floor
> are better places than out the window.
>
> --
> Geoff
> The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
> remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
> When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

What I always tell people before letting them board my Extra for an
acro ride is that they are WEARING their barf bag. I make sure their
shirt is tucked into their pants and tell them that if they've gotta
ralph, then do in their shirt. Rationale is that it's gonna get all
over them anyway so it makes no difference to them but it makes it
much less of a problem to clean up the plane. I also explain that it
is tradiional for the ralpher to clean up their own mess. I also
explain that there's a shower in the hangar and a spare shirt. ;-)
Works pretty good. So far, I've only had one person fail to contain
it. ;-)

K l e i n

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in message
...
>I too hand everyone a zip lock bag and tuck it in under their harness.
>After every figure I ask "how're you doing?", and if there's any hesitation
>or I see sweat on the back of their neck, I let them fly for a while and
>knock it off.
>
> I've only had one guy ever barf in my Extra, and he was a former Marine
> aviator and academy grad with over 50 combat missions over North Vietnam.
> He made it until we turned base to final, and then lost it.
>


My brother sent me a picture of his youngest (flys a King Air for work,
dad's airplanes for fun) and one of his buddies after a ride in my brothers
"Pitts". The buddy is standing there holding the bag - and grinning from ear
to ear...

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Viperdoc writes:
>
>> The exact mechanism is unclear to you, Anthony, because you don't know
>> what
>> you're talking about, as usual.
>
> The exact mechanism is unclear to everyone.
>
> However, if the mechanism is clear to you, why don't you explain it? That
> would be far more productive than trying to discredit me.

Because you're refractory to explanation, remember?

[Mxsmanic]

Buster Hymen writes:

> Why should Viperdoc waste his time?

He has already wasted the time of others with ineffectual personal attacks;
why not contribute to the newsgroup instead?

[Mxsmanic]

Viperdoc writes:

> You're simply not worth the effort.

I was not suggesting that you do it for me.

[Mxsmanic]

Steve Foley writes:

> Because you're refractory to explanation, remember?

I wouldn't be the only one reading the explanation.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
> > Because you're refractory to explanation, remember?
>
> I wouldn't be the only one reading the explanation.

Nobody else seems interested enough to ask.

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Buster Hymen writes:
>
>> Why should Viperdoc waste his time?
>
> He has already wasted the time of others with ineffectual personal
> attacks; why not contribute to the newsgroup instead?
>

Answering you doesn't contribute to anything.

You're a worthless pile of fecal matter.

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Viperdoc writes:
>
>> You're simply not worth the effort.
>
> I was not suggesting that you do it for me.
>

Yes you were.

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> Because you're refractory to explanation, remember?
>
> I wouldn't be the only one reading the explanation.

If somone else were to ask, they would appreciate the response. You don't
so no one responds to you with the answer.

Your bull **** in this and many other newsgroups is well known Anthony.

Haven't you figured out yet why you are not welcome in any newsgroup you
participate in.

Yes, the whole world hates you Anthony.

[Tina]

On May 27, 7:55 pm, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
> Why bother responding to Anthony- he will simply argue the point as if he's
> the world's knowledge expert on the subject. The fact remains that he
> doesn't fly, never has, never will, and therefore motion sickness from
> flight is a non-issue for him.



One can say, of course, there are times when someone ignorant of the
science has a sudden insight that can be a breakthrough, but as my
daddy taught me, that's not the way to place your bets. The chances of
that are much less likely than connecting when drawing to an inside
straight: maybe winning the lottery is a better example.

The good news is, Mx makes his pontifications in a newsgroup where
there are both experts and facts available. His kind of pseudo
knowledge is more dangerous in soft science areas: for some reason
psychology comes to mind.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Tina > wrote in
:

> On May 27, 7:55 pm, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
>> Why bother responding to Anthony- he will simply argue the point as
>> if he's the world's knowledge expert on the subject. The fact remains
>> that he doesn't fly, never has, never will, and therefore motion
>> sickness from flight is a non-issue for him.
>
>
>
> One can say, of course, there are times when someone ignorant of the
> science has a sudden insight that can be a breakthrough, but as my
> daddy taught me, that's not the way to place your bets. The chances of
> that are much less likely than connecting when drawing to an inside
> straight: maybe winning the lottery is a better example.
>
> The good news is, Mx makes his pontifications in a newsgroup where
> there are both experts and facts available. His kind of pseudo
> knowledge is more dangerous in soft science areas: for some reason
> psychology comes to mind.
>


Well, be fair, even the best psychologists are only making it up as they
go along.
in addition, who better to comment on psych probs than someone who's not
only seen 'em all, but had 'em all as well.



Bertie

[Tina]

On May 28, 4:45 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Tina > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On May 27, 7:55 pm, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
> >> Why bother responding to Anthony- he will simply argue the point as
> >> if he's the world's knowledge expert on the subject. The fact remains
> >> that he doesn't fly, never has, never will, and therefore motion
> >> sickness from flight is a non-issue for him.
>
> > One can say, of course, there are times when someone ignorant of the
> > science has a sudden insight that can be a breakthrough, but as my
> > daddy taught me, that's not the way to place your bets. The chances of
> > that are much less likely than connecting when drawing to an inside
> > straight: maybe winning the lottery is a better example.
>
> > The good news is, Mx makes his pontifications in a newsgroup where
> > there are both experts and facts available. His kind of pseudo
> > knowledge is more dangerous in soft science areas: for some reason
> > psychology comes to mind.
>
> Well, be fair, even the best psychologists are only making it up as they
> go along.
> in addition, who better to comment on psych probs than someone who's not
> only seen 'em all, but had 'em all as well.
>
> Bertie

Sorry BtB, but we actually have modalities with proven results now,
and the side effects are less severe than the psychotropic meds that
had often been used.

In terms of treatments, though, there are some here who present with a
constellation of symptoms that cry for an applied lobometry.

Applied with a hammer.



..

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Tina > wrote in
:

> On May 28, 4:45 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Tina > wrote
>> innews:3e63d246-d105-4950-925b-

>> om:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 27, 7:55 pm, "Viperdoc" >
>> > wrote:
>> >> Why bother responding to Anthony- he will simply argue the point
>> >> as if he's the world's knowledge expert on the subject. The fact
>> >> remains that he doesn't fly, never has, never will, and therefore
>> >> motion sickness from flight is a non-issue for him.
>>
>> > One can say, of course, there are times when someone ignorant of
>> > the science has a sudden insight that can be a breakthrough, but as
>> > my daddy taught me, that's not the way to place your bets. The
>> > chances of that are much less likely than connecting when drawing
>> > to an inside straight: maybe winning the lottery is a better
>> > example.
>>
>> > The good news is, Mx makes his pontifications in a newsgroup where
>> > there are both experts and facts available. His kind of pseudo
>> > knowledge is more dangerous in soft science areas: for some reason
>> > psychology comes to mind.
>>
>> Well, be fair, even the best psychologists are only making it up as
>> they go along.
>> in addition, who better to comment on psych probs than someone who's
>> not only seen 'em all, but had 'em all as well.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Sorry BtB, but we actually have modalities with proven results now,
> and the side effects are less severe than the psychotropic meds that
> had often been used.

So did the guys who used to drill holes in their heads to let the demons
out.
I'm not saying you guys don't do some good, but can you put your hand on
your heart and look into the future and tell me the people who inherit
your trade won't shudder at some of the stuff you do know? I know the
people flying whatever they will be flying in fifty years will!
>
> In terms of treatments, though, there are some here who present with a
> constellation of symptoms that cry for an applied lobometry.
>
> Applied with a hammer.


I concur.

Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> I concur.
>
> Bertie


or at least you would if you knew what it meant.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:APl%j.33$U_5.31
@newsfe15.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> I concur.
>>
>> Bertie
>
>
> or at least you would if you knew what it meant.
>
>
>

Oh but I do..



Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .

>
> Oh but I do..
>
>
>
> Bertie

Extremely lame, F.

[Tina]

> >> >> Why bother responding to Anthony- he will simply argue the point
> >> >> as if he's the world's knowledge expert on the subject. The fact
> >> >> remains that he doesn't fly, never has, never will, and therefore
> >> >> motion sickness from flight is a non-issue for him.
> >>
> >> > One can say, of course, there are times when someone ignorant of
> >> > the science has a sudden insight that can be a breakthrough, but as
> >> > my daddy taught me, that's not the way to place your bets. The
> >> > chances of that are much less likely than connecting when drawing
> >> > to an inside straight: maybe winning the lottery is a better
> >> > example.
> >>
> >> > The good news is, Mx makes his pontifications in a newsgroup where
> >> > there are both experts and facts available. His kind of pseudo
> >> > knowledge is more dangerous in soft science areas: for some reason
> >> > psychology comes to mind.
> >>
> >> Well, be fair, even the best psychologists are only making it up as
> >> they go along.
> >> in addition, who better to comment on psych probs than someone who's
> >> not only seen 'em all, but had 'em all as well.
> >>
> >> Bertie
> >
> > Sorry BtB, but we actually have modalities with proven results now,
> > and the side effects are less severe than the psychotropic meds that
> > had often been used.
>
> So did the guys who used to drill holes in their heads to let the demons
> out.
> I'm not saying you guys don't do some good, but can you put your hand on
> your heart and look into the future and tell me the people who inherit
> your trade won't shudder at some of the stuff you do know? I know the
> people flying whatever they will be flying in fifty years will!
> >

It was said at a Med School graduation not that long ago that the
dean's closing remarks included something like "half of what we taught
you is wrong, but we don't know which half."

That may be the wrong fraction these days, but the idea is still
correct. We do evidence based medicine and results based modalities
these days. One size does not fit all. Even the best of the
psychotropic drugs have about a 30% chance of having the desired
results -- that's why one monitors the effects of these meds, makes
changes and tries others if he or she can.

It's a lot less certain than flying from here to there. One the other
hand, life expectancy in the last century improved on average a month
a year - 100 months longer now than a hundred years ago, so there has
been some improvement if one accepts life expectancy as a reasonable
metric. I think quality of life expectancy has gained even more, but
have no evidence to support that claim.

But you and others are more than welcome to choose your own path to
health. There are Mxes in the health professions. You are welcome to
them.

> > In terms of treatments, though, there are some here who present with a
> > constellation of symptoms that cry for an applied lobometry.
> >
> > Applied with a hammer.
>
>
> I concur.
>
> Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:Vxm%j.55$kR5.29
@newsfe24.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>
>>
>> Oh but I do..
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Extremely lame, F.
>
>
>

Oh but it isn't.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Tina > wrote in news:f15aa3b8-e230-42fc-b180-
:

>
> It was said at a Med School graduation not that long ago that the
> dean's closing remarks included something like "half of what we taught
> you is wrong, but we don't know which half."


I think he was probably being a little optomistic, depending...
>
> That may be the wrong fraction these days, but the idea is still
> correct. We do evidence based medicine and results based modalities
> these days. One size does not fit all. Even the best of the
> psychotropic drugs have about a 30% chance of having the desired
> results -- that's why one monitors the effects of these meds, makes
> changes and tries others if he or she can.
>
> It's a lot less certain than flying from here to there. One the other
> hand, life expectancy in the last century improved on average a month
> a year - 100 months longer now than a hundred years ago, so there has
> been some improvement if one accepts life expectancy as a reasonable
> metric. I think quality of life expectancy has gained even more, but
> have no evidence to support that claim.

Well, I've had protracted stays in countries where the life expectancy
is still very low inddedd (I heard 39 quoted, but if anything it's lower
now) So you're probably right, I was only talking about the shrink
aspect in any case..
>
> But you and others are more than welcome to choose your own path to
> health. There are Mxes in the health professions. You are welcome to
> them.

Yeah, met one or two. I knew a guynie years ago who told me he could
clone a human given 10 grand. He gave it a 50/50 chance of working. This
would have been around 1992, BTW.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Wed, 28 May 2008 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST), Buster Hymen
> wrote:

>Mxsmanic > wrote in
:
>
>> Buster Hymen writes:
>>
>>> Why should Viperdoc waste his time?
>>
>> He has already wasted the time of others with ineffectual personal
>> attacks; why not contribute to the newsgroup instead?
>>
>
>Answering you doesn't contribute to anything.
>
>You're a worthless pile of fecal matter.

oh come on we can do better than that last line for style.

try
you're so full of it that your eyes are brown.

or

you're a tribute to modern adhesives.
(normally cow pats are an inch high, but with modern adhesives we see
them all the way up to your height.)

[Tina]

On May 29, 7:02 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Tina > wrote in news:f15aa3b8-e230-42fc-b180-
> :
>
>
>
> > It was said at a Med School graduation not that long ago that the
> > dean's closing remarks included something like "half of what we taught
> > you is wrong, but we don't know which half."
>
> I think he was probably being a little optomistic, depending...
>
>
>
> > That may be the wrong fraction these days, but the idea is still
> > correct. We do evidence based medicine and results based modalities
> > these days. One size does not fit all. Even the best of the
> > psychotropic drugs have about a 30% chance of having the desired
> > results -- that's why one monitors the effects of these meds, makes
> > changes and tries others if he or she can.
>
> > It's a lot less certain than flying from here to there. One the other
> > hand, life expectancy in the last century improved on average a month
> > a year - 100 months longer now than a hundred years ago, so there has
> > been some improvement if one accepts life expectancy as a reasonable
> > metric. I think quality of life expectancy has gained even more, but
> > have no evidence to support that claim.
>
> Well, I've had protracted stays in countries where the life expectancy
> is still very low inddedd (I heard 39 quoted, but if anything it's lower
> now) So you're probably right, I was only talking about the shrink
> aspect in any case..
>
The evidence is we are by most measures one of the poorer performing
segments of the health care industry. Some of us spend our
professional time working on developing improved standards of care.
It's a field needing lots of work, since for example depression seems
to be as common as the common cold . The good news for us is, there
are lots of people needing help. The bad news is, many don't recognize
their need for help -- including some members of this news group. For
some here, and elsewhere, I still think blunt force lobotomies -- 5
pound hammers come to mind -- might be appropriate. I should have
said, of course, a 5 pound hammer coming to their so called mind.

Gotta go. My next victim , ah, that is, patient, is waiting. When the
only tool you have is a hammer. everything looks like a nail.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Tina > wrote in news:1ad4e2cd-a197-4617-9818-
:
>>
> The evidence is we are by most measures one of the poorer performing
> segments of the health care industry. Some of us spend our
> professional time working on developing improved standards of care.

Hey, once you know there's a problem, eh?


> It's a field needing lots of work, since for example depression seems
> to be as common as the common cold . The good news for us is, there
> are lots of people needing help. The bad news is, many don't recognize
> their need for help -- including some members of this news group. For
> some here, and elsewhere, I still think blunt force lobotomies -- 5
> pound hammers come to mind -- might be appropriate. I should have
> said, of course, a 5 pound hammer coming to their so called mind.


I think a few have already had them. Or maybe they just watched one too
many episodes of Laverne and Shirley.
>
> Gotta go. My next victim , ah, that is, patient, is waiting. When the
> only tool you have is a hammer. everything looks like a nail.
>

Mmmm, that's good! I my use it in my sig, though I think I will change
it to a pliers and nuts.



Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

Viperdoc writes:

> Anthony, I could care less about you- it is not a personal attack, simply a
> statement of fact, just like the fact that you don't fly and are not a
> physician, and have no experience in either field.

Everything I said was correct, irrespective of whether or not I'm a physician.
If you believe it wasn't, correct it.

[Mxsmanic]

Steve Foley writes:

> Nobody else seems interested enough to ask.

The original poster asked, and I answered.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...

> Everything I said was correct

Just like your statmenet that you don't make spelling mistakes?

[Tina]

On May 29, 3:26 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steve Foley writes:
> > Nobody else seems interested enough to ask.
>
> The original poster asked, and I answered.

The OP asked for the opinion of experienced pilots. I did not think
you met that criterion.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
> > Nobody else seems interested enough to ask.
>
> The original poster asked, and I answered.

No, he didn't, and no, you didn't.

[Tina]

On May 29, 3:26 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steve Foley writes:
> > Nobody else seems interested enough to ask.
>
> The original poster asked, and I answered.

The OP asked for the opinion of experienced pilots. Does that not
exclude you?

[Viperdoc]

Anthony, you were absolutely correct in stating that you didn't know what
caused air sickness, and you are also correct in stating that you are not a
physician and know nothing about medicine. Congratulations!

[Buster Hymen]

Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:

> On Wed, 28 May 2008 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST), Buster Hymen
> > wrote:
>
>>Mxsmanic > wrote in
:
>>
>>> Buster Hymen writes:
>>>
>>>> Why should Viperdoc waste his time?
>>>
>>> He has already wasted the time of others with ineffectual personal
>>> attacks; why not contribute to the newsgroup instead?
>>>
>>
>>Answering you doesn't contribute to anything.
>>
>>You're a worthless pile of fecal matter.
>
> oh come on we can do better than that last line for style.
>
> try
> you're so full of it that your eyes are brown.
>
> or
>
> you're a tribute to modern adhesives.
> (normally cow pats are an inch high, but with modern adhesives we see
> them all the way up to your height.)
>

Good points! I'll have to try harder the next time.

It will be fun to see how many ways we can all come up with to call Anthony
a **** head.

[Buster Hymen]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in
:

> Anthony, you were absolutely correct in stating that you didn't know
> what caused air sickness, and you are also correct in stating that you
> are not a physician and know nothing about medicine. Congratulations!
>
>
>

Game, set, and match to Viperdoc!!!!

[yedyegiss]

Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> He has already wasted the time of others with ineffectual personal attacks;

Which personal attacks are those?

> why not contribute to the newsgroup instead?

Are you telling others how to post and what they should post?

[Mxsmanic]

Tina writes:

> The OP asked for the opinion of experienced pilots.

Experienced pilots don't know any more about medicine than I do.

[Mxsmanic]

Steve Foley writes:

> Just like your statmenet that you don't make spelling mistakes?

I'm quite a good speller in general. I don't exactly know why, however.

[Mxsmanic]

yedyegiss writes:

> Which personal attacks are those?

All arguments based on his opinion of me, rather than the facts at hand.

> Are you telling others how to post and what they should post?

"Why not" is a suggestion, not a command.

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Tina writes:
>
>> The OP asked for the opinion of experienced pilots.
>
> Experienced pilots don't know any more about medicine than I do.
>

You don't know **** from shinola when it comes to medicine or anything
else.

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> yedyegiss writes:
>
>> Which personal attacks are those?
>
> All arguments based on his opinion of me, rather than the facts at hand.
>
>> Are you telling others how to post and what they should post?
>
> "Why not" is a suggestion, not a command.
>

Anthony, you slither more than a snake.

[Tina]

On May 30, 11:03 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Tina writes:
> > The OP asked for the opinion of experienced pilots.
>
> Experienced pilots don't know any more about medicine than I do.

The class of experienced pilots include some MDs. One example proves
an absolute statement a lie.

The OP asked for experienced pilots who experienced motion sickness.
You are not a pilot, that makes you a fraud as well as a liar.

You do cut and paste well, however, and sometimes sound -- note the
qualification -- informed. The problem with that is you may mislead
the occasional reader.

That makes you a hazard, as well as a fraud and a liar.

Starting to sound like the 12 days of Christmas.

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Ok, let me see if I can summarize this thread:

blah blah blah blah
I'm made of rubber and you are made of glue, everything you say bounces off
me and sticks to you
blah blah blah blah

Did I miss anything?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Mxsmanic]

Viperdoc writes:

> The only ones who know more than you are the ones that are actually pilots,
> physicians, or both.

Most physicians know more. Most pilots do not.

[Mxsmanic]

Tina writes:

> The class of experienced pilots include some MDs. One example proves
> an absolute statement a lie.

But it has no effect on a generalization. Most pilots are not MDs, and know
very little about medicine, like the general population.

[Tina]

Retreating from an absolute statement again?




On May 31, 3:59 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Tina writes:
> > The class of experienced pilots include some MDs. One example proves
> > an absolute statement a lie.
>
> But it has no effect on a generalization. Most pilots are not MDs, and know
> very little about medicine, like the general population.

[Steve Foley]

Why should today be different from any other day?

"Tina" > wrote in message
...
> Retreating from an absolute statement again?
>
>
>
>
> On May 31, 3:59 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Tina writes:
>> > The class of experienced pilots include some MDs. One example proves
>> > an absolute statement a lie.
>>
>> But it has no effect on a generalization. Most pilots are not MDs, and
>> know
>> very little about medicine, like the general population.
>

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> Just like your statmenet that you don't make spelling mistakes?
>
> I'm quite a good speller in general. I don't exactly know why, however.

Probably because, after 47 years, you've finally figured out how to use ONE
reference book properly.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> Just like your statmenet that you don't make spelling mistakes?
>
> I'm quite a good speller in general. I don't exactly know why, however.

Probably because, after 47 years, you've finally figured out how to use ONE
reference book properly.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Viperdoc writes:
>
>> Anthony, I could care less about you- it is not a personal attack,
>> simply a statement of fact, just like the fact that you don't fly and
>> are not a physician, and have no experience in either field.
>
> Everything I said was correct,



Nope


Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

Steve Foley writes:

> Probably because, after 47 years, you've finally figured out how to use ONE
> reference book properly.

I've always been a good speller, and I don't need to look spellings up in
consequence.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> Probably because, after 47 years, you've finally figured out how to
>> use ONE reference book properly.
>
> I've always been a good speller, and I don't need to look spellings up
> in consequence.
>

Shame...



Bertie

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...

> I've always been a good speller, and I don't need to look spellings up in
> consequence.

So?

[yd+yg+as]

On 5/31/2008 12:05 PM Mxsmanic ignored two million years of human
evolution to write:

> I've always been a good speller, and I don't need to look spellings up in
> consequence.

So what? What does this have to do with avaiation?

[terry]

On May 31, 5:58*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Viperdoc writes:
> > The only ones who know more than you are the ones that are actually pilots,
> > physicians, or both.
>
> Most physicians know more. *Most pilots do not.

You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?

[Buster Hymen]

terry > wrote in
:

> On May 31, 5:58*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Viperdoc writes:
>> > The only ones who know more than you are the ones that are actually
>> > pilo
> ts,
>> > physicians, or both.
>>
>> Most physicians know more. *Most pilots do not.
>
> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>
>
>

Anthony doesn't know as much about medicine as either Dr. No. or Dr. Dre.

[Mxsmanic]

terry writes:

> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?

Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware, absolutely.

[terry]

On Jun 1, 7:33*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> terry writes:
> > You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>
> Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware, absolutely..

is there a sci.medicine group? perhaps you could go over there and
tell them all they need to know. Its only fair it must be their turn.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> terry writes:
>
>> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>
> Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware,
> absolutely.

If that's how you make your determination, than I can similarly conclude
that every certificated pilot knows more about aviation than you, based on
your many errors.

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> terry writes:
>
>> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>
> Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware,
> absolutely.

The physician who delivered you alive Anthony is guilty of the vilest gross
malpractice in the history of mankind.

[Tina]

On Jun 1, 8:00 am, Buster Hymen > wrote:
> Mxsmanic > wrote :
>
> > terry writes:
>
> >> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>
> > Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware,
> > absolutely.
>
> The physician who delivered you alive Anthony is guilty of the vilest gross
> malpractice in the history of mankind.

Are you in favor of retroactive abortions, Buster? Sorry, but someone
more creative than me will have to figure out how to link this to
aviation.

[Steve Foley]

"Tina" > wrote in message
...

>
> Are you in favor of retroactive abortions, Buster? Sorry, but someone
> more creative than me will have to figure out how to link this to
> aviation.

I'm not in favor of retro-active abortion, but I believe the universe takes
care of these things for us.

Some people refuse to participate in any real activities because they know
natural selection would weed them out. Instead, they stay at home , self
absorbed in their own pontifications, and provide unlimited entertainment
for the rest of us.

[Tina]

On Jun 1, 9:23 am, "Steve Foley" > wrote:
> "Tina" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > Are you in favor of retroactive abortions, Buster? Sorry, but someone
> > more creative than me will have to figure out how to link this to
> > aviation.
>
> I'm not in favor of retro-active abortion, but I believe the universe takes
> care of these things for us.
>
> Some people refuse to participate in any real activities because they know
> natural selection would weed them out. Instead, they stay at home , self
> absorbed in their own pontifications, and provide unlimited entertainment
> for the rest of us.

It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
newsgroup.

[cavedweller]

On Jun 1, 1:29 am, yd+yg+as <"d\\g=s$1ne3.ree,zero.null=0="@=gh_mhaei|
l.com> wrote:

>
> So what? What does this have to do with avaiation?

Spactecular!!

[romeomike]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> terry writes:
>
>> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>
> Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware, absolutely.

That comment makes you not only ignorant of medicine but also of the
U.S. legal system. It also makes you a number of other things, but who's
counting?

[Buster Hymen]

Tina > wrote in
:

> On Jun 1, 8:00 am, Buster Hymen > wrote:
>> Mxsmanic > wrote
>> :
>>
>> > terry writes:
>>
>> >> You seriously believe you know more than some physicians?
>>
>> > Based on some of the malpractice of which I've been made aware,
>> > absolutely.
>>
>> The physician who delivered you alive Anthony is guilty of the vilest
>> gross malpractice in the history of mankind.
>
> Are you in favor of retroactive abortions, Buster? Sorry, but someone
> more creative than me will have to figure out how to link this to
> aviation.

It has the same relevance to aviation as does Anthony - none whatsoever!

[Mxsmanic]

Steve Foley writes:

> If that's how you make your determination, than I can similarly conclude
> that every certificated pilot knows more about aviation than you, based on
> your many errors.

That does not logically follow.

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> If that's how you make your determination, than I can similarly conclude
>> that every certificated pilot knows more about aviation than you, based
>> on
>> your many errors.
>
> That does not logically follow.

Of course it doesn't. I was using your parameters.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Tina > wrote:

> It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> newsgroup.

A troll is a troll is a troll.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Tina]

On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
wrote:
> In article >,
>
> Tina > wrote:
> > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > newsgroup.
>
> A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> (goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers. Mx
provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
slip-sliding go on.

In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
mostly provides the straight man persona here.

The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.

[terry]

On Jun 2, 9:50*am, Tina > wrote:
> On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
> wrote:
>
> > In article >,
>
> > *Tina > wrote:
> > > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > > newsgroup.
>
> > A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> > --
> > Bob Noel
> > (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>
> Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers. Mx
> provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
> That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
> see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
> can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
> hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
> cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
> it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
> slip-sliding go on.
>
> In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
> mostly provides the straight man persona here.
>
> The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.

Mx is not a troll. But he does have some serious personality
problems. Apparently he also annoys people over on
alt.support.shyness. Now I wouldnt have taken Mx to be shy, but
now that I think about it , I can imagine him having some difficulties
meeting people. An introduction would go something like this.
Terry Hi , I'm Terry
Anthony No, your're not

[Tina]

On Jun 2, 3:51 am, terry > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 9:50 am, Tina > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
> > wrote:
>
> > > In article >,
>
> > > Tina > wrote:
> > > > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > > > newsgroup.
>
> > > A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> > > --
> > > Bob Noel
> > > (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>
> > Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers. Mx
> > provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
> > That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
> > see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
> > can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
> > hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
> > cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
> > it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
> > slip-sliding go on.
>
> > In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
> > mostly provides the straight man persona here.
>
> > The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.
>
> Mx is not a troll. But he does have some serious personality
> problems. Apparently he also annoys people over on
> alt.support.shyness. Now I wouldnt have taken Mx to be shy, but
> now that I think about it , I can imagine him having some difficulties
> meeting people. An introduction would go something like this.
> Terry Hi , I'm Terry
> Anthony No, your're not

[terry]

On Jun 2, 9:33*pm, Tina > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 3:51 am, terry > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 9:50 am, Tina > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > In article >,
>
> > > > *Tina > wrote:
> > > > > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > > > > newsgroup.
>
> > > > A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Bob Noel
> > > > (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>
> > > Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers. Mx
> > > provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
> > > That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
> > > see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
> > > can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
> > > hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
> > > cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
> > > it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
> > > slip-sliding go on.
>
> > > In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
> > > mostly provides the straight man persona here.
>
> > > The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.
>
> > Mx is not a troll. *But he does have some serious personality
> > problems. *Apparently he also annoys people over on
> > alt.support.shyness. * * Now I wouldnt have taken Mx to be shy, *but
> > now that I think about it , I can imagine him having some difficulties
> > meeting people. *An introduction would go something like this.
> > Terry * * * * *Hi , I'm *Terry
> > Anthony * * No, your're not- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Cat got your tongue Tina?

[Tina]

On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 3:51 am, terry > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 9:50 am, Tina > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > Tina > wrote:
> > > > > > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > > > > > newsgroup.
>
> > > > > A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Bob Noel
> > > > > (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>
> > > > Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers. Mx
> > > > provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
> > > > That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
> > > > see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
> > > > can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
> > > > hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
> > > > cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
> > > > it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
> > > > slip-sliding go on.
>
> > > > In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
> > > > mostly provides the straight man persona here.
>
> > > > The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.
>
> > > Mx is not a troll. But he does have some serious personality
> > > problems. Apparently he also annoys people over on
> > > alt.support.shyness. Now I wouldnt have taken Mx to be shy, but
> > > now that I think about it , I can imagine him having some difficulties
> > > meeting people. An introduction would go something like this.
> > > Terry Hi , I'm Terry
> > > Anthony No, your're not- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Cat got your tongue Tina?

Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!

Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
do I cite the reference?

"As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
like this.
'Terry Hi , I'm Terry
Anthony No, you're not' "

[terry]

On Jun 3, 10:31*pm, Tina > wrote:
> On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 3:51 am, terry > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 2, 9:50 am, Tina > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > > *Tina > wrote:
> > > > > > > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > > > > > > newsgroup.
>
> > > > > > A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Bob Noel
> > > > > > (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>
> > > > > Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers.. Mx
> > > > > provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
> > > > > That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
> > > > > see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
> > > > > can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
> > > > > hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
> > > > > cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
> > > > > it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
> > > > > slip-sliding go on.
>
> > > > > In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
> > > > > mostly provides the straight man persona here.
>
> > > > > The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.
>
> > > > Mx is not a troll. *But he does have some serious personality
> > > > problems. *Apparently he also annoys people over on
> > > > alt.support.shyness. * * Now I wouldnt have taken Mx to be shy, *but
> > > > now that I think about it , I can imagine him having some difficulties
> > > > meeting people. *An introduction would go something like this.
> > > > Terry * * * * *Hi , I'm *Terry
> > > > Anthony * * No, your're not- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Cat got your tongue Tina?
>
> Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>
> Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
> about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
> do I cite the reference?
>
> "As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
> this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
> like this.
> 'Terry * * * * *Hi , I'm *Terry
> Anthony * * No, you're not' "- Hide quoted text -

Being referred to in a psych class.... I always worried that would
happen to me one day!
Is there a name for Anthony's disorder? What is it? Is it curable?

[Tina]

On Jun 3, 9:01 am, terry > wrote:
> On Jun 3, 10:31 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 2, 3:51 am, terry > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 2, 9:50 am, Tina > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jun 1, 7:35 pm, Bob Noel >
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > > > Tina > wrote:
> > > > > > > > It is easy to overlook that MX does provide much of the rec. in this
> > > > > > > > newsgroup.
>
> > > > > > > A troll is a troll is a troll.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Bob Noel
> > > > > > > (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>
> > > > > > Ah, but Mx provides more interesting targets than the name callers. Mx
> > > > > > provides much more recreational and interesting fodder for the mill.
> > > > > > That's why his postings generate such interesting responses. If you
> > > > > > see a thread that involves alternate responses from Bertie and Max you
> > > > > > can be pretty sure it's an insult exchange food fight. On the other
> > > > > > hand, Mx attracts different authors, and so long as the remarks do not
> > > > > > cause you to spew coffee (or an adult beverage) all over your keyboard
> > > > > > it's low cost fun to poke sticks at flawed reasoning and watch the
> > > > > > slip-sliding go on.
>
> > > > > > In my view he unwittingly (that can be taken to mean without wit)
> > > > > > mostly provides the straight man persona here.
>
> > > > > > The biggest mistake would be to take someone like Mx seriously.
>
> > > > > Mx is not a troll. But he does have some serious personality
> > > > > problems. Apparently he also annoys people over on
> > > > > alt.support.shyness. Now I wouldnt have taken Mx to be shy, but
> > > > > now that I think about it , I can imagine him having some difficulties
> > > > > meeting people. An introduction would go something like this.
> > > > > Terry Hi , I'm Terry
> > > > > Anthony No, your're not- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Cat got your tongue Tina?
>
> > Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>
> > Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
> > about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
> > do I cite the reference?
>
> > "As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
> > this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
> > like this.
> > 'Terry Hi , I'm Terry
> > Anthony No, you're not' "- Hide quoted text -
>
> Being referred to in a psych class.... I always worried that would
> happen to me one day!
> Is there a name for Anthony's disorder? What is it? Is it curable?

I don't do diagnosis at a distance, but Anthony does seem to exhibit
oppositional behavior as a predominant clinical feature, doesn't he?

I do feel confident in predicting his symptoms are temporary and will
no longer manifest themselves in less than 50 years. More seriously,
when one does recognize he or she may have a mental disorder
(professionally we -- sorry about the technical language -- might say
"nutty as a fruit cake") we hope they seek help. Metal disorders,
recognized of not, diminish quality of life. Having said that, Mx's
'contributions' to this group do provide recreation, don't they?

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT), Tina >
wrote:

>On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:

>
>Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>
>Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
>about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
>do I cite the reference?
>
>"As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
>this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
>like this.
>'Terry Hi , I'm Terry
>Anthony No, you're not' "
>
>
>
Tina correct attribution is important in the academic world.
can I suggest....

a ratbag australian pilot once wrote a very succinct description of
the illness in a two line hypothetical conversation on usenet.
Terry " Hi , I'm Terry"
Anthony replies "No, you're not "


I know he's a ratbag australian pilot 'cause it takes one to know one.
:-)
Stealth Pilot

[Tina]

On Jun 3, 11:26 am, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT), Tina >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
> >> On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
> >Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>
> >Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
> >about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
> >do I cite the reference?
>
> >"As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
> >this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
> >like this.
> >'Terry Hi , I'm Terry
> >Anthony No, you're not' "
>
> Tina correct attribution is important in the academic world.
> can I suggest....
>
> a ratbag australian pilot once wrote a very succinct description of
> the illness in a two line hypothetical conversation on usenet.
> Terry " Hi , I'm Terry"
> Anthony replies "No, you're not "
>
> I know he's a ratbag australian pilot 'cause it takes one to know one.
> :-)
> Stealth Pilot


Well, now I'd have do define ratbag. Is that a rating, like single
engine land, or a different level of certification, as in ratbags are
authorized to teach wannabe (is a wannabe a musical instrument in Au?)
pilots?

I think I' ll just take the phrase as my own, in the best tradition of
the internet.

[terry]

On Jun 4, 1:26*am, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT), Tina >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
> >> On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
> >Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>
> >Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
> >about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
> >do I cite the reference?
>
> >"As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
> >this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
> >like this.
> >'Terry * * * * *Hi , I'm *Terry
> >Anthony * * No, you're not' "
>
> Tina correct attribution is important in the academic world.
> can I suggest....
>
> a ratbag australian pilot once wrote a very succinct description of
> the illness in a two line hypothetical conversation on usenet.
> Terry * * * * " Hi , I'm *Terry"
> Anthony replies * * "No, you're not "
>
> I know he's a ratbag australian pilot 'cause it takes one to know one.
> :-)
> Stealth Pilot- Hide quoted text -

that would be ratbag eastern australian , there are a different breed
out west. still cannibals I hear.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:47:38 -0700 (PDT), terry >
wrote:

>On Jun 4, 1:26*am, Stealth Pilot >
>wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT), Tina >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
>> >> On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>>
>> >Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>>
>> >Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
>> >about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
>> >do I cite the reference?
>>
>> >"As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
>> >this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
>> >like this.
>> >'Terry * * * * *Hi , I'm *Terry
>> >Anthony * * No, you're not' "
>>
>> Tina correct attribution is important in the academic world.
>> can I suggest....
>>
>> a ratbag australian pilot once wrote a very succinct description of
>> the illness in a two line hypothetical conversation on usenet.
>> Terry * * * * " Hi , I'm *Terry"
>> Anthony replies * * "No, you're not "
>>
>> I know he's a ratbag australian pilot 'cause it takes one to know one.
>> :-)
>> Stealth Pilot- Hide quoted text -
>
>that would be ratbag eastern australian , there are a different breed
>out west. still cannibals I hear.
>
>
I'm eastern australian as well. thats why you havent noticed an accent
:-)

[terry]

On Jun 5, 11:45*pm, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:47:38 -0700 (PDT), terry >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 4, 1:26*am, Stealth Pilot >
> >wrote:
> >> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT), Tina >
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Jun 3, 8:16 am, terry > wrote:
> >> >> On Jun 2, 9:33 pm, Tina > wrote:
>
> >> >Guess your final comment was so funny I was speechless!
>
> >> >Some psych students may hear that in a lecture soon! It says so much
> >> >about a certain class of people in only two lines. The problem is, how
> >> >do I cite the reference?
>
> >> >"As Terry of rec.aviation piloting says, introductions to people with
> >> >this disorder might go like this: An introduction would go something
> >> >like this.
> >> >'Terry * * * * *Hi , I'm *Terry
> >> >Anthony * * No, you're not' "
>
> >> Tina correct attribution is important in the academic world.
> >> can I suggest....
>
> >> a ratbag australian pilot once wrote a very succinct description of
> >> the illness in a two line hypothetical conversation on usenet.
> >> Terry * * * * " Hi , I'm *Terry"
> >> Anthony replies * * "No, you're not "
>
> >> I know he's a ratbag australian pilot 'cause it takes one to know one.
> >> :-)
> >> Stealth Pilot- Hide quoted text -
>
> >that would be ratbag eastern australian , there are a different breed
> >out west. *still cannibals I hear.
>
> I'm eastern australian as well. thats why you havent noticed an accent
> :-)- Hide quoted text -

well I'll be a sock with a hole in it, I thought you flew out of
Jandakot?, or was you just borned in the east and got
transported? :<)

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> "nutty as a fruit cake") we hope they seek help. Metal disorders,
> recognized of not, diminish quality of life. Having said that, Mx's
> 'contributions' to this group do provide recreation, don't they?

Hell, most days his threads are the only ones actually discussing piloting
or aviation.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Zin2k.143316$TT4.19212@attbi_s22:

>> "nutty as a fruit cake") we hope they seek help. Metal disorders,
>> recognized of not, diminish quality of life. Having said that, Mx's
>> 'contributions' to this group do provide recreation, don't they?
>
> Hell, most days his threads are the only ones actually discussing
> piloting or aviation.

Slurp

Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Hell, most days his threads are the only ones actually discussing
>> piloting or aviation.
>
> Slurp
>
> Bertie

That would have been a good opportunity to make an opposing point. Shame you
don't have one.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>>> Hell, most days his threads are the only ones actually discussing
>>> piloting or aviation.
>>
>> Slurp
>>
>> Bertie
>
> That would have been a good opportunity to make an opposing point.


I did.


> Shame you don't have one.
>

Of course I do.


Bertie