The stunning aerial photos taken with just a camera and a kite - by the inventor of 'kite-ography'

On 8/28/10 2:36 PM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 11:24 AM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six
years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is of
it,
the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of the
above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all the
rest
of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame him
for
not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.
Is Fox evil or stupid?

The free-spending Congress has been in since 2006, and with a socialist
POTUS I would give it about two more years before the US leads the world
in
another Greece Failure.

But for some reason, it's Bush's fault...

I see. so you are saying that Bush had no veto power

Indeed not. But when you have packs of DemoRats to fight it is useless:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3xhsznt

"In his eight years in office George Bush vetoed twelve bills and was
overridden four times. From 1789 through 2010, the veto has been used 2,563
times by U.S. presidents, making fifty-eight the average number of vetoes
issues by a U.S. president. One hundred-ten of those vetoes have been
overridden (roughly four percent). Of his twelve vetoes, Bush had four
overridden (thirty-three percent). This leaves him behind only James
Buchanan (fifty-six percent) and Andrew Johnson (fifty-two percent) as
having the most vetoes overridden by Congressional vote."



Stomp your feet, cover your eyes and scream "Nooooooo" at the top of your
lungs.

Are Libtards stupid or evil? Both!

Whoosh!

The sound of the wind leaving your sails? ;-)

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is of
it, the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of
the above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all the
rest of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame him
for not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.

Obama added more to the deficit in EIGHTEEN MONTHS than Bush did in eight
YEARS!

And for what? The 2700-page so-called stimulus bill which added $878 billion
to the deficit just to begin with, and which Obama & Co. passed over solid
Republican objections, and which most of the American people DID NOT WANT,
has done nothing for the economy or unemployment. Remember when Obama
insisted the bill would have to be passed IMMEDIATELY (i.e., before anyone
had a chance to read it) or the unemployment rate, then about 8%, would go
higher? And good old Nancy Pelosi, very devoted if not very bright,
explained: "We have to pass it so you can see what's in it" -- remember
that?

So the bill, which Obama had promised the American people would have a
chance to read for five days before he would sign it (Obama Broken Promise
#278 or something) was passed obediently and promptly by the whole flock of
Democrats and immediately signed into law by him, apparently without anyone
knowing exactly was in it, including Obama himself, and the American public
was left in the dark.

And the result? Unemployment rose to over 10%. And stayed there or rose
higher: the official rate is now about 9.5% -- the actual rate, including
those no longer looking for work and therefore no longer part of the
official "unemployed," is apparently about 17% and will probably rise
further.

Meanwhile, billions of taxpayer dollars were used to pay off the union
bosses, bankers and financial people, and other Obama supporters.

Is Fox evil or stupid?

If you watched Fox News instead of MSNBC you'd know a lot more about what's
going on than you evidently do.

Peter wrote:
"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 11:24 AM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six
years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this
connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is
of it,
the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of the
above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all
the rest
of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame
him for
not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.
Is Fox evil or stupid?

The free-spending Congress has been in since 2006, and with a socialist
POTUS I would give it about two more years before the US leads the
world in
another Greece Failure.

But for some reason, it's Bush's fault...

I see. so you are saying that Bush had no veto power


Stomp your feet, cover your eyes and scream "Nooooooo" at the top of your
lungs.

Are Libtards stupid or evil? Both!

Whoosh!
See my prior link to the program.


Does anyone wonder why George Kerby has occupied a place in my killfile
ever since I started reading this group?
Allen

On 8/28/10 5:03 PM, in article
, "Allen"
wrote:

Peter wrote:
"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 11:24 AM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six
years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this
connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is
of it,
the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of the
above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all
the rest
of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame
him for
not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.
Is Fox evil or stupid?

The free-spending Congress has been in since 2006, and with a socialist
POTUS I would give it about two more years before the US leads the
world in
another Greece Failure.

But for some reason, it's Bush's fault...

I see. so you are saying that Bush had no veto power


Stomp your feet, cover your eyes and scream "Nooooooo" at the top of your
lungs.

Are Libtards stupid or evil? Both!

Whoosh!
See my prior link to the program.


Does anyone wonder why George Kerby has occupied a place in my killfile
ever since I started reading this group?
Allen

Actually, no one gives a ****. Next question...

On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 16:29:28 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

And the result? Unemployment rose to over 10%. And stayed there or rose
higher: the official rate is now about 9.5% -- the actual rate, including
those no longer looking for work and therefore no longer part of the
official "unemployed," is apparently about 17% and will probably rise
further.

Bush did his part to hold down unemployment. He created a war that
killed hundreds of Americans before they could become unemployment
statistics.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six
years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is of
it, the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of
the above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all the
rest of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame him
for not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.

Obama added more to the deficit in EIGHTEEN MONTHS than Bush did in eight
YEARS!

And for what? The 2700-page so-called stimulus bill which added $878
billion to the deficit just to begin with, and which Obama & Co. passed
over solid Republican objections, and which most of the American people
DID NOT WANT, has done nothing for the economy or unemployment. Remember
when Obama insisted the bill would have to be passed IMMEDIATELY (i.e.,
before anyone had a chance to read it) or the unemployment rate, then
about 8%, would go higher? And good old Nancy Pelosi, very devoted if not
very bright, explained: "We have to pass it so you can see what's in
it" -- remember that?

So the bill, which Obama had promised the American people would have a
chance to read for five days before he would sign it (Obama Broken Promise
#278 or something) was passed obediently and promptly by the whole flock
of Democrats and immediately signed into law by him, apparently without
anyone knowing exactly was in it, including Obama himself, and the
American public was left in the dark.

And the result? Unemployment rose to over 10%. And stayed there or rose
higher: the official rate is now about 9.5% -- the actual rate, including
those no longer looking for work and therefore no longer part of the
official "unemployed," is apparently about 17% and will probably rise
further.

Meanwhile, billions of taxpayer dollars were used to pay off the union
bosses, bankers and financial people, and other Obama supporters.

Is Fox evil or stupid?

If you watched Fox News instead of MSNBC you'd know a lot more about
what's going on than you evidently do.




Yup! Bush through accounting tricks kept the true cost of two wars off the
books.



--
Peter

"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 5:03 PM, in article
, "Allen"
wrote:

Peter wrote:
"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 11:24 AM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six
years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A
very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this
connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby
make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is
of it,
the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of
the
above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all
the rest
of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame
him for
not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.
Is Fox evil or stupid?

The free-spending Congress has been in since 2006, and with a socialist
POTUS I would give it about two more years before the US leads the
world in
another Greece Failure.

But for some reason, it's Bush's fault...

I see. so you are saying that Bush had no veto power


Stomp your feet, cover your eyes and scream "Nooooooo" at the top of
your
lungs.

Are Libtards stupid or evil? Both!

Whoosh!
See my prior link to the program.


Does anyone wonder why George Kerby has occupied a place in my killfile
ever since I started reading this group?
Allen

Actually, no one gives a ****. Next question...


Not about your opinion. Did you follow my prior link to is Fox evil or
stupid?

--
Peter

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 16:29:28 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

And the result? Unemployment rose to over 10%. And stayed there or rose
higher: the official rate is now about 9.5% -- the actual rate, including
those no longer looking for work and therefore no longer part of the
official "unemployed," is apparently about 17% and will probably rise
further.

Bush did his part to hold down unemployment. He created a war that
killed hundreds of Americans before they could become unemployment
statistics.

You haven't noticed the death toll rising rapidly because of Obama's
increasing our activity in Afghanistan? And Afghanistan is hopeless. Nothing
good will ever come of it. Every American life lost in Afghanistan is an
American life wasted, just thrown away for nothing. And this is OBAMA'S war.
It's what he wanted and said so all along.

The war in Iraq was quickly won and at relatively little cost, as far as the
actual war against Saddam is concerned. The aftermath, our occupation etc.,
was certainly bungled badly and I'm not making any excuses for that, nor do
I think the invasion was really called for in the first place. But for
however little good it did, the war at least was won. Obama's war in
Afghanistan will never be won. We've already had troops there longer than we
had them in Vietnam, are you aware of that?

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:32:47 +0100, bugbear
wrote:

Joel Connor wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:06:16 -0700 (PDT), Val Hallah
wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...mera-kite.html

Let's see....

I flew a Brownie Box camera on a string of 4 box-kites 47 years ago. Using
a string dipped in potassium-nitrate to make it into a slow-burning fuse.
It would eventually, many minutes later, burn the string that was
stretching the rubber-band attached to the shutter release. You timed the
delay by the length of the string-fuse.

He's 47 now, he got his first camera when he was 12. That's 35 years ago.
Yet he invented aerial kite photography. The only reason I did it was
because so many had done it before me with much more elaborate equipment.
Fancy "Cody Box-Kites" being the preferred lifting device for kite aerial
photographers. I was an extremely precocious child. I wanted to see if I
could do it even more inexpensively using whatever I had at hand. The paper
box-kites, 4 of them for enough lift for that heavy Brownie-cam, cost me a
whopping $3.00 at the time. That put a hefty dent in my piggy-bank. I would
have made the kites, but I was too anxious. 4 of them would have taken a
long time. The cotton string and rubber-band from a junk-drawer, the
potassium-nitrate from my home-brew chemistry kit. Back then you could buy
just about any chemical you wanted from the local drug-store. Oh, I forgot
to mention. I also added a wind-vane made of a discarded aluminum pie-pan
to the back of the camera. So I could point the camera in whatever
direction to the wind that I wanted.

Yeah, sure, he was "the inventor of 'kite-ography'.

Google for KAP (kite aerial photography) if you want to get a history
lesson of cameras being flown on kites.

I bet Al Gore is this guy's brother. You know Al? The chap that invented
the internet.

The pomposity of these foolish brits never ceases to amaze.


Oh, please don't assume the Daily Mail is representative of Britain.

No more than Fox news represents the USA.

What's quite interesting (assuming the text above was copied from the site)
is that the story text is now substantially different, and
doesn't carry the phrase "he invented aerial kite photography".

And yet there's no mention of an edit ;-)

BugBear

Then why is there the phrase "Pictured: The stunning aerial photos taken
with just a camera and a kite - by the inventor of 'kite-ography'" in h1
font size at the beginning of the article?

Copied HTML source: h1Pictured: The stunning aerial photos taken with
just a camera and a kite - by the inventor of 'kite-ography' br/h1

This only reaffirms my strong suspicion that you're uselessly blind
whenever you've tried to give any kind of opinion at all about any
photography. Thanks for clearly confirming this for everyone.

On 8/28/10 7:40 PM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 5:03 PM, in article
, "Allen"
wrote:

Peter wrote:
"George Kerby" wrote in message
...



On 8/28/10 11:24 AM, in article
, "Peter"
wrote:

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote:
"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
On 20/08/2010 12:38, Val Hallah wrote:

I don't see how anybody can go to America, work there for six
years
and not be enthralled by the energy of the free market. America
taught
me the power of the free market, as opposed to the State, to
improve
the lives of the vast majority of ordinary people.

Including all those ruined by subprime loans...

There is a difference between free market energy and greed. A
very
fine
line, but it is there

What lens are you using? I can't see it :-)

I'm looking hard and I can't see it either. "Greed" in this
connection
seems to be just the anti-capitalist's view of capitalism.

Corporations exist to provide goods and/or services and thereby
make
profits. I'm all for this arrangement and think the more there is
of it,
the better. It's when the state meddles in it (as in the case of
the
above-mentioned subprime loans) that things begin to go sour.



There is none so blind ................

. . . as those who swallowed Obama's hopey-changey stuff, and all
the rest
of that pie in the sky blather. Exactly.


Let's see. Obama takes over after 8 years Bush has changed the largest
surplus in history to the largest deficit in history. You now blame
him for
not fixing it in two years. Makes logical sense to me.
Is Fox evil or stupid?

The free-spending Congress has been in since 2006, and with a socialist
POTUS I would give it about two more years before the US leads the
world in
another Greece Failure.

But for some reason, it's Bush's fault...

I see. so you are saying that Bush had no veto power


Stomp your feet, cover your eyes and scream "Nooooooo" at the top of
your
lungs.

Are Libtards stupid or evil? Both!

Whoosh!
See my prior link to the program.


Does anyone wonder why George Kerby has occupied a place in my killfile
ever since I started reading this group?
Allen

Actually, no one gives a ****. Next question...


Not about your opinion. Did you follow my prior link to is Fox evil or
stupid?

1. Nor yours.

2. If I wanted to live in FantasyWorld I would have bothered.

You don't seem to understand the simple fact that if you wanted people to
agree with your ideas, you don't start with adversarial statements like
that. But, like most Leftists, the idea that more are attracted with sugar
than vinegar (or for that matter, feces, in your case), goes "whoooshhhh" -
as you are so fond of stating.