I do that because I want to hear different perspectives on something. I don’t know if it’s a bad habit or a good habit sometimes it serves me well and sometimes it doesn’t serve me so well. Very often by going back to a first principal in a question I will hear some interesting perspectives that I may not have considered. And then there’s times that nobody has any idea what the fuck I’m even talking about.
Do you have any idea how many assumptions you made in that short paragraph? If I were as judgmental as you i would be angry all the time. I have no desire to be profound, I simply enjoy hearing how others might approach a subject. I already knew that I was going to hear that there is not enough water or that the earth isn’t flat. But I also had hoped that I would hear something new, which I did.
Welcome to the thread. Since no earth-shattering news has come out about Joe or Hunter Biden, contrary to your predictions in the thread you were banned from, has that caused you to reassess anything at all in terms of news sources, reality, anything?
Or, are you like a cultist who, when armageddon doesn’t arrive on time, comes up with excuse after excuse?
This implies there are times when people do understand you.
Were you ever a lineman for the county?
Is this true? I don’t see why it would be. Sure, life might never have come on land, but the vast majority of life is aquatic anyway.
I assumed you were high (on pot or something else).
Sadly Wichita Kansas isn’t in Wichita County…
The funny thing is I knew that. For work I’d spent a bunch of time in the city of Wichita & the surrounding Sedgwick county back in the 1990s. But I sure didn’t remember it. Tyanks for the point-out.
Although I don’t think the lyrics are 100% explicit on whether he works for Wichita county or just lives in/near Wichita city while working for “the county”.
I grew up in a place where one of the 'burbs had the same name as the containing county. But most everybody including me lived in other 'burbs or unincorporated areas. Mostly we just called it “the county”, especially when referring to the government. The name was mostly reserved for referring to the city.
Not that it matters. 
This is my frequent hypothesis when reading many of the questions/explanations posed by the pittee. It’s not meant as a slam, but an observation. THC does unlock what seem to be profound insights to many a user, but said insights do seldom stand up to scrutiny or result in new scientific principles.
There’s no real harm in it, and it may well not be the case for HoneyBadgerDC. But if a post makes me think the poster is in such a state, I tend towards prejudiciously dismissing post and poster.
In case anyone is wondering, I lived in Sedgwick, KS (the city) then later moved to Newton for a bit. Both are north of Wichita.
Which Men North of Wichita?
I’ll see myself out.
But as falls Wichita, so falls Wichita Falls.
Well, when Jimmy Webb wrote the song, he was in Washita County, Oklahoma, but ain’t nobody need a song about Oklahoma.
One of the first jazz albums I ever bought! Metheny led me to Ornette Coleman, which really opened my ears (and pissed off my college roommates).
Heck, Oklahoma has a whole darn musical about it. But the year I spent in OK pretty well sold me on the idea that it’s nothing to sing about.
I’m now wondering how the locals pronounce “Washita”? “wah-SHEET-ah”, “wush-uh-TAH” or ???
A bit of research suggests “wa-SHI-tuh”. Which would be an easy corruption into “Wichita” for greater name recognition and commercial appeal.
Which is probably why Webb changed it before publishing it. Footnote “A” in the Wiki extract shown above says “Replaced in Webb’s lyrics with Wichita, for singing purposes.”
And really, if you’re not intimately familiar with the Great Plains, south-central Kansas and southwest Oklahoma are completely interchangeable.
I lived there a year, and flew all over western OK & southern KS for that year. Drove around a lot on weekends visiting random small town just becuase I could.
And I’ve looked down at it while passing overhead for decades since. Yeah, visually and culturally it’s pretty much one big space.
Actually I think it was a pretty good question, except that it needed a little more time pondering to figure how to articulate the nagging feeling of improbability that drove it. Properly phrased the question was:
We live on a planet for which water covers the majority of the planet, but there are large swaths of dry land. In order for this to happen the amount of water has to be within a fairly narrow range. Too much and it covers everything, too little and you get mostly land with just a few small seas. Why is it that the amount of water lies within this range.
Possible explanations are:
- Its just just happened that way.
- Its not actually a narrow range, some water and some dry land is the most likely outcome.
- Its the anthropic principle at work
- There is something about geology that makes the land rise up so that its partially above sea level regardless of the amount of water.
Asking the question to determine which of these (or which combination of these) is the correct one is a totally worthwhile question.
You are actually very close right there. Another feature I was hoping to see discussed is how surface area of the ocean affects climate. I know water is considerably lighter than rock, but I also know that it exerts forces differently. So I was curious as to if the outward forces of water against continents had any effect on them. Honestly, I just saw it is a conversation starter. I may have spent too many years hanging out in coffee shops where we throw something out there and for the next 2 hours we just see where it takes us. I already know what my thoughts are on something, so I am really interested in hearing yours. Being vague will often allow for elements to come in that I have not even considered. In the future I will try and be more direct, no promises!