---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forecasts for Southern Ontario issued by Environment Canada
at 3.30 PM EST Thursday 26 February 2009
for tonight Friday and Friday night.
Huron - Perth.
Tonight : Cloudy. Rain beginning this evening.
Low plus 3 with temperature rising to 8 by morning.
Friday : Rain changing to light snow in the afternoon.
Temperature falling to minus 7 in the afternoon.
Friday night : Clearing in the evening.
Low minus 20. Wind chill minus 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Forecasts for Southern Ontario issued by Environment Canada > at 3.30 PM EST Thursday 26 February 2009 > for tonight Friday and Friday night. > Huron - Perth. > Tonight : Cloudy. Rain beginning this evening. > Low plus 3 with temperature rising to 8 by morning. > Friday : Rain changing to light snow in the afternoon. > Temperature falling to minus 7 in the afternoon. > Friday night : Clearing in the evening. > Low minus 20. Wind chill minus 29. >
Saw the TV news this morning. N. Dakota has similar temps for today you
mention. Yet, forecast high for Brownsville, TX is 93F for today. The
latter is not typical for late winter for Brownsville, TX. Most of TX is
unseasonably warm as is the rest of the earth.
--
Dave
CDOs are how we got here.
A modified version, new taxes in the future, is how Congress will get us
out?
Posted by Billy on March 3, 2009, 6:40 pm
"Dioclese" <NONE> wrote:
> No, I don't make over 250K, far from it, and don't want your sympathy > irregardless.
O.K., then I'll criticize your English.
Irregardless, with its illogical negative prefix, is widely heard,
perhaps arising under the influence of such perfectly correct forms as:
irrespective. Irregardless is avoided by careful users of English. Use
regardless to mean 'without regard or consideration for' or
'nevertheless': | I go walking every day regardless of season or weather.
> > Some poorly backed CDOs are what in effect killed the economy.
Isn't it convenient that the new bankruptcy laws (2 years ago) allow for
bankruptcy on yachts and second (or third) homes, but not on principal
residences. Somebody saw today's crisis coming but could our
representatives in congress sound the alert to their constituencies? Of
course not.
--
Why? Politicians use this messy jargon everyday. Both in written
legislation, and political campaign promises. No one seems to care, so I
thought it was acceptable.
As far as spelling a word that is misleading by its commonly accepted
surface defintion, you're right. MS Word spell check won't let me use
"irregardless". No, I don't use any form of spell or grammar check.
If that's all you got is a spell check, I'll bow out now.
--
Dave
CDOs are how we got here.
A modified version, new taxes in the future, is how Congress will get us
out?
> "Dioclese" <NONE> wrote: >> No, I don't make over 250K, far from it, and don't want your sympathy >> irregardless. > O.K., then I'll criticize your English. > Irregardless, with its illogical negative prefix, is widely heard, > perhaps arising under the influence of such perfectly correct forms as: > irrespective. Irregardless is avoided by careful users of English. Use > regardless to mean 'without regard or consideration for' or > 'nevertheless': | I go walking every day regardless of season or weather. >> >> Some poorly backed CDOs are what in effect killed the economy. > Isn't it convenient that the new bankruptcy laws (2 years ago) allow for > bankruptcy on yachts and second (or third) homes, but not on principal > residences. Somebody saw today's crisis coming but could our > representatives in congress sound the alert to their constituencies? Of > course not. > -- > Billy > Democrat and Republican Leaders Behind Bars > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7843430.stm >
Posted by Phisherman on March 5, 2009, 11:32 am
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:07:03 -0600, "Dioclese" <NONE> wrote:
>Why? Politicians use this messy jargon everyday. Both in written >legislation, and political campaign promises. No one seems to care, so I >thought it was acceptable. >As far as spelling a word that is misleading by its commonly accepted >surface defintion, you're right. MS Word spell check won't let me use >"irregardless". No, I don't use any form of spell or grammar check. >If that's all you got is a spell check, I'll bow out now.
All that matters is the reader understands what was said. I've known
people without a HS diploma who can communicate better than a
well-educated individual or a Usenet grammer cop. I'm not about to
proof read my posts like I would in a business letter. In east TN
there are many words spoken not understood elsewhere, perhaps that's a
good thing.
XML site map
> < Celcius degree temps.>
>