ForsbergTheGreat
-
Posts
12,354 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by ForsbergTheGreat
-
-
“According to the plane's radar data, the plane took off and climbed normally during the first two minutes of the flight. Then it stopped transmitting data.
Cox says that indicates something probably interrupted the power to the transmitters. Typically, he says, when that happens, a second generator will supply power. That does not appear to have happened in this case. He called it "very unusual."
Larry Vance, a former pilot and Transportation Safety Board accident investigator, told CBC News Network that losing the signal like that indicates that something "catastrophic" had to have happened. He noted that the plane has "lots of sources and lots of backups" for power.”
-
1
-
-
“Keith Mackey, president of Mackey International, an aviation consulting firm specializing in safety and risk management, suggested that, given the plane's recorded speed and altitude during takeoff, which were normal, and the fact that it landed very close to its last recorded location, the cause was probably not an engine failure.
Mackey, a former pilot and aircraft accident investigator, said an engine problem would have made the plane unable to climb that quickly. He added that in the case of an engine fire or similar problem, the pilots would likely have been able to steer the plane and land it safely.“
-
1
-
-
Just now, RowdyCanuck said:
Maybe that's why Ford and dodge owners don't get along.......ones stroking and the other is cummin hmmmmmmm lucky I'm a Chevy guy lol
Me too im currently Chevy (well GMC) guy although I have owned both in the past. I’m due for something new though and haven’t really decided.
-
1 minute ago, RowdyCanuck said:
Hey now that's how us country folk figure out if we can trust you....
see I never trust a Ford owner, cause their always stroking...........
Opposed to dodge owners always..... cummin
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, Warhippy said:
What do I know, I paid $1.13.9 at an Esso off of Yankee Valley near Market on the 1st but I guess my receipt is lying.
But here's a REALLY good question for Forsturd and the rest of you.
IF!!! Carbon tax is killing you all and raising prices so much, why are you in here defending how cheap and inexpensive gas is?
I mean y'all sound like schrodingers wexiteers arguing for something the lot of you say is a terrible thing.
Haha first you quote Lethbridge, then you post a Calgary chart, in which I easily debunked both. Now you’re quoting airdrie, with an anecdotal claim and no source/proof to back it up in an attempt to defend the bogus chart you posted. Fun fact is I ask my coworker who lives in airdrie and she even laughed at you, she said if you paid 113.9 then you got duped because no where else was in those ranges. Highest she saw was 108 and the was only bright in the am until they adjusted later in the day. Also Talked to people at the head office of UFA and they also said none of there stores between red deer and Lethbridge went that high. Oh yeah that same esso today is at 99 cents.
That chart also without a source that was shut down by your favorite news source “CBC” in which screen captured the months average gas prices....for Calgary.
yet still, here you are not willing to admit you made a mistake and you keep digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole, all because you blindly jumped on to anti conservative tweet without fact checking, your as bad as the gullible sucks that repost rebel news.
Typically you are better than that and leave the Facebook gossip type news to kos and Rupert, I don’t know maybe you were still hungover from New Years and that’s forgivable. But for some reason you keep trying to stick with it, despite the piles of evidence that disagrees with you. You made a mistake own it and move on.
Carbon tax doesn’t just affect the price at the pump. As someone who uses the benefit of Alberta’s cheap natural gas to sell it to companies around the world I see the direct effects on our margin to how much carbon tax affects our business. But here I am trying to explain alberta energy business to a photographer from BC.
and that’s Mr. Forsberg to you.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:
I would check your source. This is totally inaccurate.
It's been a while since I have seen it over a buck
Don’t you know hip knows more about Alberta then albertan’s do. Haha
He’s been caught, he saw an anti-conservative tweet, jumped the wagon and reposted it in an attempt to act smart and condescending like everyone else with a agenda to prove. He didn’t do his fact checking. Then instead of just admitting his error, he doubled down by posting another inaccurate image without a source (again in an attempt to pretend he’s smarter than the rest of us) and once again Is wrong.
Here’s a link from his most trusted source displaying his latest attempt is wrong again. as you can see, not once did Calgary prices average higher than $101.6 in the month of December despite his last post saying prices weren’t lower than 1.11 haha
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5411645
Let’s see if he can go for the 3 swing strike out.....
-
3
-
-
10 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:
I countered that part stating that Tkachuk would come in and prove more than Vietnamese or McCann ever did and that he was ready. JB would have no choice despite Jared and Jake.
I doubt we get Petey if we drafted Tkachuk. No way he gets past the Rangers.
Yeah it’s meaningless and harder to predict. Hence why we should be happy with how things turned out. Likely could of been a lot worse right now.
For some reason I’m now hungry.
-
4
-
-
5 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:
@Warhippy I can't speak for BC because I haven't been there in a while but fuel prices all over Alberta and even in Calgary are all different you can go to one it's 99 9 go a block down the road and it's 89 9 so surely your Tweet grab the highest one they seen and you without having any knowledge of Alberta whatsoever decided to post it and assume oil companies are gouging without understanding the the trucking companies now are adding on a cost on everybody is adding cost on hip that's how it works they pay it so they put it on to the consumer if this is your way to try and defend JT over this carbon tax you are out of your comfort zone
Yep that’s exactly what happened. Hippy got played and dupped. because it was anti conservative he didn’t bother to check the facts, just grabbed his pitchfork and jump on the wagon, this is how unwarranted anger spreads, all simply done by a calculated tweet focused on stirred up people exactly like hip and it clearly worked. this is why we need a war room, to stop this type of made of narrative against our industries.
ps. I took a screen shot this morning of the gas prices in Lethbridge. See post above.-
3
-
-
44 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:
Owns a shirt depicting the lynching of his PM....and thinks it's totally acceptable....yet can't fathom how anyone can advocate a buy back of assault rifles....
Assault rifle? Hmm definition please.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Warhippy said:
good question
You need to learn how gas prices are calculated a lot more goes into than just taxes.
And I also call BS I was in Lethbridge on the weekend the gas was 99.8 when I filled up. Friend texted me yesterday it jumped up to 108.2. Checked gas prices this morning and it’s only 102.9
https://www.gasbuddy.com/GasPrices/Alberta/Lethbridge
but hey if conservative hating twitter user says it, it’s got to be true. Look at the amount of commotion outside of that city he got. Sucked you right in, bet you retweeted that too.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:
Fun fact: For as "terrible" a pick as Jake was, taken 2 players before him was Sam Bennett, the player taken right before Jake was Dal Colle, and the player taken right after Jake was Haydn Fleury.
Point is that, considering how many busts there were that were initially projected to go right around where we were picking, we got off pretty good.
I don’t know if I can call Bennett a bust. While Bennett might not be the high point producing player he was expected to be as flames highest ever draft pick, he has built himself out a valuable role in the NHL. Same with Jake even if he hadn’t started producing, I don’t think you could label him a bust as he would has still amounted to valuable bottom 6 NHL player.
I think the word bust gets thrown around to easily, in my opinion at least a bust is a player with high expectations that either didn’t make the NHL at all or had a very short NHL impact. (Reinhart, Dal Colle, Filitov, Brendl). I have a really had time labeling anyone who plays over 500 career NHL games a “bust”.
I think most players that get labelled bust are really just disappointing picks, or players that never amounted peaked to their forecasted value (Gudbrandson, Bennett, Murray, Johnson).
If I had to rank picks I’d have 4 categories
Bust
Disappointment
Meets expectations
Exceeds expectations
It terms of Jake, If you look at 11 players picked between 2006-2016 and use the average as the expectations, if Jake can become a consistent 50 point player few next years I think I would bump him up to meet expectations and really that’s all you can ask from a GM.
Tkachuk, Zacha, Virtanen. Monahan, Lindholm, Zibanejad, Connolly, OEL, Filitov, Gagner, Brassard
-
2
-
1
-
-
head up ossi you put Pearson in the proposal, not toffoli
-
1
-
3
-
-
I’m surprised this hasn’t been mentioned much but Joulevi’s career is eerily similar to another top 5 pick, Thomas Hickey. Drafted in 07, 4thoverall by the Kings, Hickey went back and played 2 seasons before making the jump to the AHL. At the end of his second season Hickey got injured which required surgery and forced him to miss the remained of the season and spend all summer rehabbing. Then he enters his rookie season in the AHL and in November gets set back with another injury that also required surgery which kept him out till April, he gets back and two games later gets injured again with a high ankle sprain keeping him out the rest of the year.
By the time he turned 22 he already had 3 major injuries, two of which required surgery. He eventually made his way into the NHL at the age 23 and put together a respectable NHL career. Not exactly the career the Kings were forecasting when they took him 4th overall but he’ll likely pass the 500 NHL game mark next season.
-
2
-
-
38 minutes ago, inane said:
Lol what?
The logical fallacy is strong with you.
You just finished saying burden of proof need not apply to politics. If statistics and facts are completely ignored in making a decision that affects a large group of people then what kind of system are you supporting.
35 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:This "discussion" is hilarious....."critical thinking"..."intelligent discourse"....
Rupert you are the prime example of lacking the skillsets to apply critical thinking to a discussion. When I made that statement, it was directed to you. Tell me more about what professor Mickey Mouse believes, or tell me about how a potential one off (that didn’t even come to forwishing) is the result Climate change. Rather than reading a headline that assumes correlation equals causation, try to apply the slightest bit of logic to the why and how. You will be so much better off in life and it’s what differentiates understanding between a child and an adult. So rup are you able to grow up?
-
15 hours ago, inane said:
law is not politics. you'll go crazy trying to apply that paradigm to political decisions.
Ah so full support for a dictatorship. Glad you can admit it. Guess that’s what it comes to when you blindly support something and have no evidence to back up why you do.
14 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:its laughable is what it is. The CPC and its supporters loved the supremacy of federal jurisdiction over firearms when they wanted to cancel the long gun registry. But when it comes to how they don't want it used, suddenly we have US-style gun rights. Its quite funny to watch the squirming over it. Instead of accepting reality you see the fight mentality out of Alberta in particular that gets them nowhere.
Haha. Really showing your lack of knowledge once again. the long gun registry was the equivalent to throwing money directly into the trash. I know that’s what you liberals enjoy doing but cons had evidence to make a calculated decision and put an end to a pointless money pit.
14 hours ago, Warhippy said:It's fear. Pure and simple.
I'm a registered owner. I own 3 nice guns now. Locked. Secured. In my safe. I'm not worried at all about these new laws.
That’s because you own super soaks not firearms. Lol. You obviously are not one of the 60k Canadians that does own an AR. These are the people the will be effective so it’s not surprising why YOU wouldn’t be worried.
QuoteIt's a meh law, and it has people scared for no reason other than someone told them they should be scared. exactly the types who don't need to own weapons.
I know your busy pretending to be an economist but the person that to people to be scare in none other than Canada’s public safety minister Bill Blair and echoed Trudeau. It’s pretty hard to defend when it comes straight from the horses mouth. Although I know you will try (and fail).
-
2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:
but you can't disagree
its literally how it is in our system. Its like saying you disagree with paying your taxes. Good luck.
no it’s not. You are so out to lunch on how the legal system works.
Again Law 101.
Burden of proof - The obligation to produce evidence to prove facts necessary to establish a cause of action or a defence. It normally rests on the person who asserts a particular matter. The burden of proof requirement is designed to ensure that legal decisions are made based on facts rather than by conjecture.
Liberals are the one making the claim that spending 600 million on a buyback program for the AR Is an effective way to spend tax dollars. Therefor the burden of proof is on them or anyone else in alignment with that decision to “provide facts and evidence” to support your claim. So far the only facts posted are ones that shut down that idea.
Now because you know that there are no facts to support your claim, you are attempting to shift the goal posts by moving the burden of proof on those against. It’s a very weak attempt, an furthermore your adjusting the criteria to support why owning X is a legal right, which is a pure strawman to the topic at hand.
If you and the liberals or anyone else wants to support the idea of spending 600 million on removing the AR then provide evidence and facts that explain why.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Warhippy said:
So much for being "all for intelligent discussion" round here
It takes two to have a discussion. And when the other half lacks the necessary skillsets to engage in such debates, all you get is facts and statistical evidence refuted with “it might help” or memes about penis sizes.
So far in the debate about why the govt needs to spend 400-600 million on a buy back program for semi auto rifles, the only facts presented are the ones explaining why it’s a dumb idea and a waste of money. That this program serves no real purpose other than a political play.
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:
it might do some good.
Very sound basis to spend between 400-600 million.
All. while ignoring all statistics that suggest it will have ZERO impact as Canada does not have an semi auto rifle issue
QuoteNow you - whats your legal basis to own one?
Why does he need a legal basis to own one? You and the liberals are the ones trying to remove it, there for the burden of evidence is on you to prove why he shouldn’t be able to.
That’s law 101. Some attorney.... more like a property lawyer.
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:
I bet you support Fed Con Party and if you were american you would support Trump ?
There is absolutely no reason in Canada for any person to own a AR.
Turn them all in the melt them into something useful.... maybe make a few cans for Salmon....
Oh yeah, i forgot that next to no salmon returned to CDN rivers this year...
This coming from a guy who’s anti women, anti gay rights. Really creepy that a senior citizen is talking about penis sizes on a hockey forum. I wouldn’t let my kid go anywhere near someone like you, I suggest getting some help.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, BPA said:
To be fair...
I haven't heard any recent gun problems that should prompt a buy back on the AR-15.
Perhaps a happy medium is to ban all future sales of the gun. Gun belongs to current owner and cannot be transferred (aka passed to son). It can be sold to the government via the buy back program. This way, the gun will eventually be phased out in a generation or two.
I guess my question is why do we need to phase out that gun? There are 100's of different types of iterations of AR's legally purchased in Canada. If there aren't any issues or problems with why the need to adjust anything. This really comes down as a political play and nothing more. politicians love to play on peoples emotions in order for people to bypass facts and statistics, right wing politicians do it all the time with immigration. Left wing do it with firearms, they all purposely spreed fear so that people believe they need to elect XYZ in order to protect them from the big bad monster, the monster they created.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, BPA said:
Well...they don't allow suped up sports car that are not street legal on the roads. So maybe that's the AR-15 in the gun world?
Nope far from it. It's actually far less powerful than the 7mm I own.
Just now, BPA said:You still have handguns, rifles, and shotguns (aka economy, sedans, minivans, etc). So it's not like you are deprived of choice.
I think the problem so many of you struggle explaining is the why? Why are we going to spend 600 million on a buy back program without any statistical evidence in Canada showing that it's a real threat. But but the US...as I explained above we are not the US, nothing like it.
-
2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:
is that really such a bad way of thinking? we're really not that different from the US to think it can't happen more up here, and if thats the "gun of choice" then whats the problem?
Yes it is a bad way of thinking. It's completely ignorant to think we and our laws are anything like the US.
I know facts that disprove your opinion is what you claim as BS but AR's and Semi Auto's including handguns are all restricted firearms, This means in order to purchase one legally the person needs to go through a series of hoops. Hoops such obtaining your restricted PAL licences by completing a two day course that teaches use, full background check including conversation with people that know you about your temper, obviously not having a criminal record but also having it checked daily, being part of a gun club, only using and transporting your firearm to and from gun club.
Here read this, you might learn a thing or two.
And then add on the firearm laws such as having a maximum magazine capacity of 5 rounds.
https://gundebate.ca/magazine-capacity/
Or the fact that there have been only 2 incidents involving a AR-15 in the Canada in the last 20 years. Heck even in the states Ar15's truly only represent a very small fraction of the total gun deaths.
But yes, we are so very close to being on the verge of becoming the next USA.....
-
2
-
-
On 12/12/2019 at 11:41 AM, RUPERTKBD said:
I'm thinking @ForsbergTheGreat might throw his hat in the ring....
Doesn't pay enough...too many skeletons in my closet.....on second thought, if a racist that loves wearing blackface can get your voted, then I guess i should be ok.
but If I were...
First order of business. Become totalitarian.
Second order, remove reproductive rights. Only allowing people willing to pay a high birthing tax to have children. This immediately curbs poverty, climate change, and the impending future unemployment surge that will be caused by automation. Elitist, sure but it's a sacrifice i'm willing to live with.
Third order, burn down that dump hole surrey.
Forth order, give myself a raise.
On 12/12/2019 at 11:41 AM, RUPERTKBD said:....he's already got the arrogance, condescension and general disdain for any opinion that doesn't mirror his own.....
There's too much stupid in this world. I'm all for informed and educated discussions with people that are capable of involving critical thinking. The problem is too many people (left and right wing) don't have the intellect to be able to engage in something that like. Instead you got the gullible sucks, who read a head line that supports their argument and immediately post without even reading the full cherry picked logic. AKA continuing to post the link that actually references Mickey Mouse and Dumbledore as scientist. haha
On 12/12/2019 at 11:41 AM, RUPERTKBD said:....and hey, he's already got "The Great" in his name....
Shocking, but my real name actually isn't ForsbergTheGreat.
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
53 minutes ago, -AJ- said:NHL.com has your back:
Note that this is since 2005-06 (though it might be 2007-08 since I'm not sure these were tracked before then) and with a minimum of 100 games played with the Canucks. "SAT For" his shot attempts for and SAT is the net of the for and against.
EDIT: Upon further looking, I'm pretty sure it is since 2009-10, because Edler has exactly 664 games played since then, so I'll re-post my last table since 2009-10, but with other good info:
Unfortunately NHL.com doesn't calculate for us what percentage of his shots actually hit the net, but luckily for you, you have your resident stats nerd, AJ to do it for you:
That’s awesome works. First thing that pops out is edlers shots do seem to be getting through.
Which means it could just be a case that because he takes so many more shots, he’s has a higher number (not average) of shots that don’t get through, which to the eye is more noticeable.-
5
its literally how it is in our system. Its like saying you disagree with paying your taxes. Good luck.
[Signing] Flames re-sign Rasmus Andersson
in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Posted
Haha it was determined, that was a lie.
there was a nerdy report (https://edmontonweathernerdery.blogspot.com/2016/06/versus-calgary-part-1.html?m=1)
that proved edmonton does have colder temperatures. Heck even today as we speak edmonton is 4 degrees colder.
Edmonton has colder winters and while Calgary gets more snow due it is proximity to the mountains, but that proximity also bring Calgary more chinooks and warms breaks during the winter. Calgary’s also more prepared to handle the snow with plows constantly ready to go. And depending who you are snow isn't really a bad thing, especially those that like winter activities.