🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <71ai5o$5ss$1@news.NERO.NET>,
Dave Rabinowitz <daver@holmes.ECE.ORST.EDU> wrote:
>I don't have to imagine a process which prevents the river from doing
>something; you need to define a process which causes the river to do
>something.  So far you haven't succeeded.

I assumed that we were working from the assumption that the banks were
eroding. If they are already eroding, then it is safe to assume that
the process is already taking place and that it will continue. You
might notice that I didn't need to succeed in defining a process for
erosion, it takes place whether I do that or not.  If you were
expecting a fluid dynamics course starting from first principles, well,
I guess you will have to wait for the movie.

But yes, if you want to support the 13 MILLION dollar boondoggle, you
really DO need to imagine a process that prevents the river from doing
something, because that is what the money is being spent to
accomplish.  There must be some idea how to "prevent the river from
eating up the riverbank".  If you can't imagine such a process, then
you have admitted that the money is a waste.

>You have to do a lot better than just waving your hands.

You are an example of why people support measure 59. If you are going
to lobby for (or against) ballot measures, you should use something
besides state resources. At least you are not as bad as the student that
was running a porno web site out of his dorm room on the university
network.