jnkyrdoff6

Same. I bet he would have had like 5 picks, 20 sacks, and 150 tackles this year.

Why BYU when the Big 12 could take TCU or Houston?

New position? Must be similar to Notre Dame's hunchback.

That's a big issue for a lot of libertarians. However, I don't think IP should be protected because once someone purchases or make some kind of voluntary exchange with another individual, whether it is for a book, music, classes, or an ipad that product becomes the purchasing person's property. When it becomes their property they can do with it however they choose and if that means copying it and producing similar, or better products, they are well within their rights. What they cannot do though is turn around and try to sell someone else's products as their own. Not because it would infringe upon the creator's rights, but rather because it would be an act of fraud commited against the individual who was buying the products under false pretenses. You say that this might be a disincentive to produce, but actually historically it has shown to increase technology and prosperity. Individuals are always looking to benefit from and becoming the first to create or innovate is one way to better oneself and benefit greatly. That's true. Like I said, I can also see the case for no IP rights because that way everyone can understand anything. Thus, anyone can innovate anything. I saw a special on Hong Kong's economy by John Stossel. In it he showed how they could take apart anything, tweak it slightly, and capitalize on it. You've presented a good argument for no IP rights. I think I can agree with that. That was the second issue of my two issues with complete anarchism. The other I've already expressed. I haven't been dissuaded from that stance. I can see it like Thoreau wrote in one of his essays, that it's against human nature to have a standing army. I understand that it also takes away some of our freedoms, but I still think it's a necessary evil, because I don't see anyway a nonchoesive U.S. could defend itself against enemy attacks. I don't mean to make you into some kind of a human search machine or anything when I bring up these points. You can disscuss something with me without having to search for articles backing you up all the time. I write something like "I read that somewhere online" all the time. In fact, I have it up in the first paragraph where I say "I saw a special on Hong Kong's economy by John Stossel." I don't have any problem with it. I don't expect anyone else does. If they do, I don't really care. If you're unsure about a stat or something then I can see it, but otherwise it's totally up to you. I read your link; it's just that I don't want you to feel like you have to find a link, because execpt for the army point, I think I agree with all your other stances.

I don't have kids, but I think I was 5 or 6 when I fist said something like that to my dad. Don't be surprised if he gets in a couple fights with you when he gets older. I think it's just the father-son relationship or something.

I didn't really have anything to disagree with here. I don't want anyone to get the wrong impression; for the most part I'm on Husker_x's side. I just thought I'd add a few closing thoughts from my side, as you've had yours from your side. I imagine this will be the last post from this conversation, because it's hard to retort to someone who agrees with you. I'm not going to debate that. I don't personally believe anyone should do any of those things to promote their religion. In some ways I feel it's wrong because I don't believe our government should be influenced religiously, but at the same time I can understand where they're coming from too. I do think it's stupid in a way though to do those things, but it's just my opinion. After getting sodomized by politicians many times in the past why continue it? I guess that's just not my idea of a good way to spend my time and money. In my mind, you and I see religion in the same way, it's just that you treat it differently than I do. Pretty much sums up how I feel too, but, again I just think I look at it differently. It's more of a "I don't really care", rather than a "I have a problem with that" kind of attitude. As far as the first part of the paragraph is concerned, I know what you mean. There is a lot of narrow-mindedness in this world. As far as the second part is concerned, that's exactly what religion is "eye witness testimony."

Could reference Western Kentucky, our first game, or could be UDub, who many see as our toughest non-conference game. I think the Huskies throw the Dub a lot. It just isn't shown because they've sucked so much in the last few years with last year being the exception.

Hey I just want to say don't quit. Don't let anyone talk it down or anything. I've heard some people belittle working out like that because it's not traditional weight lifting. The standard push-up works more muscles than any lift. Hershel Walker didn't lift a weight till college and came in at 215 or something like that by just doing push-ups, sit-ups, jumping rope, and dips. edit: and I should add that he's the fittest 47 year old ever to have lived, without a doubt. He's way more fit than Jack Lalane was at that age.

Seriously, I want to know. Personally, I'm torn as to whether or not I think intellectual property should be protected. If you don't think so that's fine, but if you do, it would be hard to enforce them without a governing body. I can't see of any way to do so.

Boy, what a class act.

That's true, but if you want to prove something isn't real, you have to prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt. Which is exactly the thing no one is trying to do. Manhattan's point still stands. I can't disprove Santa Clause, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Bigfoot, Aliens, Time Traveling Shadow People, Mole People, or God. I also have yet to see a compelling piece of evidence that demonstrates any of them actually exist. The theist attempts to say that my inability to disprove the last one makes it reasonable to accept it, but seems to think that believing in all the others on the list is absurd. Funny how that works. The thing is with the exception of Santa and the Spaghetti Monster, which we know are made up, all of the things you listed could be real. That's the point you were making. I guess we just have different views on how to deal with that. To you, I guess, if it seems unlikely, but can't be completely disproven, it's as good as disproven. To me though, I put the idea on a kind of a shelf, and just don't think about it anymore, because to me there's no point. I'm just saying that I know people who think like me exist, and to disprove the existence of God to them, you're going to need to completely disprove it. We've got different view points somewhere. I can't reach into your brain and see how you think, but I think a lot of the things you listed are possible. The existence of Big foot is slightly possible, maybe a .01% chance, and the existence of aliens somewhere in the universe is extremely possible, >50%. That's how I feel at least. It might just be that to believe something might exist you have to have overwhelming evidence. That's not how I feel. If someone makes a claim, I believe it's possible until proven otherwise. If I didn't know the Spaghetti Monster was made up, I'd deem it possible. I just think that when people are presented with cases of visions and claims of God talking to them, it's all possible. Until proven otherwise, a lot of people will continue to feel that way. I also think that, for the majority of people, life is too hard to live without the belief in a higher power. A lot of people need a purpose or a cause to go on living because they think that little of the lives they currently live.

I'm not trying to disprove your point. I'm just saying I don't think being 6'2" is any kind of a barrier to him being a good RB. If you look at a height distribution HEIGHT DIST you'll see that being 6'2" puts him in the 96.8 percentile for human males. That means 3.2% of the average population is taller. Of course it's rare. Being that tall is rare period. You rarely see guys that are below 6' playing a non RB or DB position. Guys that are usually cast into other spots from a young age. Again, I'm not trying to disprove your point. I'm just saying it shouldn't cause a problem.

Eric Dickerson, exception number 3. Should I name others? It only seems rare to have a running back that tall because the 90s was the decade of the scatback. Really even though it doesn't seem that tall to me, the average male height is well below 6'2".

Adrian Peterson (Vikings) 6'1" Exception number two...

That's true, but if you want to prove something isn't real, you have to prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

Which is actually a bad thing, if the height is legit. Reason being he will have a tougher time getting low to stop edge rushers. And if he plays inside, it will be much easier for DTs to gain leverage on a much taller opponent. And being still in HS, he's likely to grow more. So you have to wonder how tall he will get. I actually hope for once a kids height isn't right and he is a few inches shorter than listed. It seems like the NFL covets these tall OT, 6'5" - 6'7" has almost become the standard especially the Left Tackles. You don't see very many 6'3" guys at that spot any more. I imagine it's b/c of the arm length the have. If he is 6'9" he's going to have a huge reach advantage against almost anybody he matches up against. If he can develop great technique and has quick enough feet he's going to be very very tough to pass rush against. Iowa is like an OL factory they seem to send quality O-linemen to the NFL every year. They must have seen something they liked in him to offer him. And who knows 10 yrs down the road everyone might be looking for that 6'8" - 6'9" OT. Arm length is fine, but that would be beneficial for a shorter man to keep defenders out of getting into him. At Sterup's supposed height, defenders are going to constantly force him to prove he can bend and move. Edge rushers are going to dip their shoulder to get under his blocks. DT's will use his height as a disadvantage to consistently get under his pads to set him off balance. Really, his best hope is at OT. Very few OG's make it being tall. I remember researching one that there are very few OG's in the NFL who are even 6'5 or taller. Football is a game of leverage, and more times than not, the low man wins in that case. Being at an extreme height is a huge disadvantage in his case, and it's why most people at Sterup's supposed height choose other sports to succeed. Height is definitely an advantage at OT, especially in pass blocking. In the interior it is less important. You're right about that.

Isn't there an NFL DE with this last name? I can't remember who he plays for, maybe the Giants. It doesn't seem like it's too common of a last name.

Stanford??? His favorite???

Luckily, we should all know within a couple weeks.

red in a squeaker...

absolutely

I agree that property rights must be upheld to the fullest. The other flaw, though, that I see with complete anarchism is that I don't see any way for protection of intellectual property. I'm not debating that privatized law enforcement agencies can protect properties rights generally, but they'd have no jurisdiction on inventions and other cases of intellectual property. Do you contend that protecting intellectual property is unimportant? I know that some areas in Asia have few intellectual property barriers, which is partly how they've been able to become technologically savvy. They can reverse engineer everything without the fear of infringing on patents and things like that. I still think that it provides less incentive for people to innovate though. If you know anything you invent is going to be reverse engineered, why invent something in the first place if your window for capitalizing on it is so small?

I think this thread could be extremely beneficial to aid in a coherent discussion. My definitions would probably be very similar to yours though SOCAL. I don't really want to take sides, but I suppose if I had to I'd say I'm more sympathetic to your side.

The link didn't work