Niclas I will respond to you off line. Jim
On 7/11/07, Niclas Runarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I sure won't leave it right after that punch! So Jim... when did I put someone down??? When do I say that a comment is irrelevant??? When did I look down on someone??? I sincerely doubt that you base your message on Allan's reply to your offlist question, asking if he felt that I put him down. (Just to let you in on a little secret: Allan is one of my closest friends here and one of the last people here that I would look down on.) I didn't understand Allans question since I didn't know which part of my message he was refering to, so I wanted him to leave out the part of MY OWN message that was irrelevent to the question. The only one here saying that someone's comments is irrelevant are yourself, in the first line. The only one here looking down on someone because they can't grasp are yourself, giving me this because I couldn't understand the question. Most people don't like being put down. Make sure there's a reason before you do it yourself. /Nick -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- *Från:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *För *jim phillips *Skickat:* den 11 juli 2007 23:49 *Till:* [email protected] *Ämne:* Re: [VFB] Now Lightning! This whole discourse has become irrelevant. The original question from Chuck was " Should I or should I not get to shore and get out of my boat during an actual or threatened lighting storm" and many messages ago it was answered - YES but go where there are a lot of trees and DO NOT stand by the biggest. The education process of these messages, although at first were positive and enlightening, have long past become boring and now to say one persons comments are irrelevant; makes the educational process negative and non-enlightening. Not all of us have education beyond high school. It took me 10 years to get a college degree by going to night school after returning from VietNam. But I know enough not to put others down and look down upon them because they can't fully grasp a concept put forth. It is sort of like the Avant Gard of Fly Fishers that look down upon bait fishers. Let's end it and talk FISHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Deserttrout06 Jim On 7/11/07, Niclas Runarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Don't know which part you're refering to as I can't see where I said > anything about which travelled farther than the other. Please specify or > > leave out the irrelevant parts. (Don't forget that English isn't my > first > language.) > > Nick > > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > För > Allan Fish > Skickat: den 11 juli 2007 22:32 > Till: [email protected] > Ämne: [VFB] Now Lightning! > > > >Chuck, > > > >It depends on the part of the cloud. The most common thundercloud has > >one negative pole and one positive pole. The ground-to-cloud bolt goes > >between the negative part of the cloud and the positive charge sent out > > >by objects on the ground as the negative package approaches the ground. > > > >Leaving what I learned in school and going further with help from a > >magazine, I want to correct "up-down depends on balance in charge" > >(obviously misinformed in school): The cloud-to-ground thundercloud is > >a three-part cloud... positive-negative-positive. A cloud-to-ground > >bolt is simply the exact opposite. It goes between the upper positive > >charged part of the cloud down to the negative ground. TOTALLY it's > >less common than the ground-to-cloud since it needs to be closer to the > >ground (so they are more common in places with higher altitude). > > > So, Nick. > > Are you telling me that the much heavier positively charged ions > travel farther than the miniscule-weight electrons? I find that a > tad difficult to grasp. Of course, it's be *^*&^ years sends I had > physics (the class, not the tablet!). > > a. > > > -- > Allan Fish > Greenwood, IN > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >
