For me it was a family picnic in the mountains of N Pakistan a few years ago. Managed to procure this little gem and proceeded with cousins to shoot up half a mountainside.
At the end of the day
Ak84: Da**mn that was fun
Ak84’s Dad (a former army officer); it is fun, yes, right up till the time the other guy starts firing back.
Oooppps
And for you?
I once said it must be very difficult for blind people driving cars because they would not be able to see to read the maps. :smack:
Look, it was a long day, the light was going, and my boyfriend just would not stop the car so we could properly put an internal light on. And … and … the dog ate my homework or my Grand Supply of Excuses or something, OK? 
The Beatles.
The BEAT les. OOOOooooooooh. Derrrrrrr. I didn’t ever make the connection until a few years ago (I was only about 3 or 4 when the whole mania thing started, but still). I’m not sure why either I usually cotton to word type stuff pretty quickly.
Somebody recently talked about reading *Sneeches on Beeches *to their kid, who asked “Why didn’t the Starless Sneeches just get their own stuff?”. I’ve loved the story for more than 30 years, and now I can’t quite look at it the same way.
Nature documentaries and some T.V. shows (like Dirty Jobs). I never really thought about how there always has to be some guy there getting that camera shot. Every time you see an amazing school of fish or a pride of lions hanging around ripping up a zebra there’s some dude squatting behind a shrub with a camera. He’s got to set up and wait there for hours, hoping for maybe 15 minutes of decent footage.
On shows like Dirty Jobs, they’ll have a shot of the host crawling down some filthy drainpipe or something. But to get the shot the camera guy has to go down there first, dragging a bunch of heavy, delicate equipment with him.
I never though of putting the apostrophe after the D.
I don’t get it. Would you elaborate?
On shows like “Man vs. Wild” whatever cliff face the host is climbing up, there must be a cameraman doing the same thing but with a big-ass camera on his/her back while trying to get the shot. Makes the talking head seem like kind of a wimp, eh?
Man vs. Wild, yes. Survivorman, no - on that show, the host does all his own camera work and is completely alone. (He’s got a GPS phone in case things go pearshaped, though.)
What I love about Dirty Jobs is how a lot of times they show you that part.
On shows like “Nanny 911” where they are trying to discipline the kids with time-outs I always feel for the kids thinking “must be really comfortable sitting in the corner for punishment with Bob the cameraman in your face 4 feet away from you”.
That’s what I love about Survivorman. If there was a shot of him climbing down a cliff, first he had to climb down the cliff, set up the camera, climb back up the cliff, then climb back down the cliff while the camera was rolling.
So what, there’s a second camera person who climbed down there to get the shot of the first camera person?
It’s camerapeople all the way down!
Huh…sorry I just not getting it? But were the Monkeys given the name to imply that they eat Beatles?
When I was a teen I loved astrology- I didn’t take it too seriously but I thought it was “cool”. Then one day it occurred to me to wonder: “ok, so each constellation has a certain meaning and each planet has a certain meaning, and their movements have certain meanings. How did anyone ever work out what meant what?.” That more or less ended it for me.
CanvasShoes never got that “Beatles” was a pun on “beat,” as in a musical beat.
No, they show Travis getting stuck from back at Point A.
Me to boyfriend: The printer isn’t plugged into your computer. I need to print something. What I can unplug from the back of your computer so that I can email the document from my laptop to the desktop and then print it?
Boyfriend to me: …Why don’t you just plug the printer into your laptop?
Me: :smack:
That seems like a manageable question. If the influence of stars and planets were consistent, you could learn them by observing the traits they produce in people born under them.
The big issues seem to be the fact that the influence is far from consistent - indeed, people born under the same signs vary wildly - so the actual predictive ability of astrology is nil. And no mechanism has been found (or, so far as I know, even been postulated).