TxHoops

100 percent agree.

[Hidden Content] Someone needs to tell those gomers in Collie Station that the law only changed 2 years ago making that, in effect, no longer a thing. Caruso is an NBA player so he can afford a UT lawyer but he could even slum with a fellow aggy and walk these charges.

I was wondering the same thing. But he’s never entered the portal to my knowledge. Whoever it is, they might have to be a walk on. I could be wrong but I’m not sure they have any schollies left.

This one is for my favorite Catholic 😉 A teenaged boy goes to confessional. “Forgive me Father for I have sinned. I have been with a loose girl.” The priest asks, “Is that you, Little Johnny?” ”Yes, Father, it is.” ”And who was this girl you were with?” ”I can’t tell you Father. I don’t want to ruin her reputation.” “Well Johnny, I’m sure to find out her name sooner or later, so you may as well tell me how. Was it Emily Jones?” ”I cannot say.” ”Was it Lauren Peter’s?” ”I’ll never tell Father.” ”Was it Amelia Parker?” ”I’m sorry, but I cannot name her.” ”Was it Grace Smith?” ”My lips are sealed.” ”Okay, so it was Mia O’Malley then?” ”Please Father. I really can’t tell you.” The priest sighs in frustration. “You’re very tight-lipped, and I admire that. But you have sinned my son, and you have to atone. You can no longer continue to be an altar boy until 4 months have passed. Now go and behave yourself.” ”Yes, Father.” Johnny walks back to his pew, and his friend Jimmy slides over and whispers, “What’d you get?” Little Johnny grins... “Four months vacation and 5 good leads!”

Hogs had a fight at the bat rack...

Yeah that was a big get for them. McCain was no earth shattering news. He’s been there since the spring after a brief stop at Clarendon. It was widely known he was going to be playing for the Seahawks next season. And obviously that is huge for Lamar PA as well.

Love this story my friend. As I predicted, this has become one of my favorite threads. Now I’m about to watch this video you posted.

One of the most impressive things about Sigler to me is that he is still doing it. He’s done it long enough, he could have ridden into the sunset with his rings and a full retirement. Kudos to him for continuing to impact young men’s lives for the love of the game.

By the way, keep this thread going my friend. Might end up being my favorite place to visit on this board.

You’re a spring chicken compared to Hagar. I kid you @Hagar I kid.

Henderson was a junior. But he’s a high major WR so it wouldn’t surprise me if he doesn’t play this year with Morris transferring.

Those wondering why Lamar switched conferences need look no further than this recruiting class. I hear from coaches at Sam and SFA that they are now being able to recruit better players as well. As far as Lamar goes, there are multiple kids coming in who wouldn’t be if they were still in the Southland. This should be a really good, competitive league.

You’d better. We haven’t watched a game together in too long.

Great season Bobcats! Very proud of you guys.

Yes indeed

There was a word for girls like you in high school...

Yes - on KOGT

Ok, one last post and then I’m really done. It is amazing to me that I can have frequent philosophical or political differences with many on this board (Hagar, LRF, baddog, BSWildcats, the late great stevenash - to name a few), without resulting in juvenile name calling. Granted, with a few, we have had such discussions in person as well and are assuredly friends off of this board. But some I have never met but still respect greatly. I wonder what the common denominator would be in the differences in discourse? Hmmmmm. As such, I will try (on the rare occasions I visit this portion of the website) to keep the discussions civil and respectful. I’m afraid that requires limiting who discussions are had with. Sad, but true. NOW, you guys can carry on with this discussion, if you choose, without me.

And for finality, and to repost something from another thread where a list of questions was answered, I will copy and paste here a post of mine from a few years ago (with which, like then, I will make my way back to the sports board): I really was just trying to educate and present some real news that is apart from the normal droll of this board. But just so not to avoid the "questions" you guys like to pose, I would offer the following on my way back to the sports' boards 1) The Earth is warming Global warming is not an output of computer models; it is a conclusion based on observations of a great many global indicators. By far the most straightforward evidence is the actual surface temperature record. While there are places — in England, for example — that have records going back several centuries, the two major global temperature analyses can only go back around 150 years due to their requirements for both quantity and distribution of temperature recording stations. These are the two most reputable globally and seasonally averaged temperature trend analyses: NASA GISS direct surface temperature analysis CRU direct surface temperature analysis Both trends are definitely and significantly up. In addition to direct measurements of surface temperature, there are many other measurements and indicators that support the general direction and magnitude of the change the earth is currently undergoing. The following diverse empirical observations lead to the same unequivocal conclusion that the earth is warming: Satellite Data Radiosondes Borehole analysis Glacial melt observations Sea ice melt Sea level rise Proxy Reconstructions Permafrost melt There is simply no room for doubt: the Earth is undergoing a rapid and large warming trend. Sure there are plenty of unsolved problems and active debates in climate science. But if you look at the research papers coming out these days, the debates are about things like why model predictions of outgoing longwave radiation at the top of the atmosphere in tropical latitudes differ from satellite readings, or how the size of ice crystals in cirrus clouds affect the amount of incoming shortwave reflected back into space, or precisely how much stratospheric cooling can be attributed to ozone depletion rather than an enhanced greenhouse effect. No one in the climate science community is debating whether or not changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations alter the greenhouse effect, or if the current warming trend is outside of the range of natural variability, or if sea levels have risen over the last century. This is where there is a consensus. Specifically, the “consensus” about anthropogenic climate change entails the following: the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability; the major cause of most of the observed warming is rising levels of the greenhouse gas CO2; the rise in CO2 is the result of burning fossil fuels; if CO2 continues to rise over the next century, the warming will continue; and a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment. While theories and viewpoints in conflict with the above do exist, their proponents constitute a very small minority. If we require unanimity before being confident, well, we can’t be sure the earth isn’t hollow either. This consensus is represented in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (TAR WG1), the most comprehensive compilation and summary of current climate research ever attempted, and arguably the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. While this review was sponsored by the UN, the research it compiled and reviewed was not, and the scientists involved were independent and came from all over the world. The conclusions reached in this document have been explicitly endorsed by … Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil) Royal Society of Canada Chinese Academy of Sciences Academié des Sciences (France) Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany) Indian National Science Academy Accademia dei Lincei (Italy) Science Council of Japan Russian Academy of Sciences Royal Society (United Kingdom) National Academy of Sciences (United States of America) Australian Academy of Sciences Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts Caribbean Academy of Sciences Indonesian Academy of Sciences Royal Irish Academy Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences … in either one or both of these documents: PDF, PDF. In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed or published the same conclusions as presented in the TAR report: NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies(GISS) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Academy of Sciences (NAS) State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS) American Geophysical Union (AGU) American Institute of Physics (AIP) National Center for Atmospheric Research(NCAR) American Meteorological Society (AMS) Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS) If this is not scientific consensus, what in the world would a consensus look like? 2) Man is the cause No one credible is arguing that man is the sole cause. However, it is naive at best to somehow convince one's self that man isn't playing a large role. It’s true that natural fluxes in the carbon cycle are much larger than anthropogenic emissions. But for roughly the last 10,000 years, until the industrial revolution, every gigatonne of carbon going into the atmosphere was balanced by one coming out. What humans have done is alter one side of this cycle. We put approximately 6 gigatonnes of carbon into the air but, unlike nature, we are not taking any out. Thankfully, nature is compensating in part for our emissions, because only about half the CO2 we emit stays in the air. Nevertheless, since we began burning fossil fuels in earnest over 150 years ago, the atmospheric concentration that was relatively stable for the previous several thousand years has now risen by over 35%. So whatever the total amounts going in and out “naturally,” humans have clearly upset the balance and significantly altered an important part of the climate system. 3) This warming is detrimental to the Earth's health I don’t know if there is a meaningful way to define an “optimum” average temperature for planet earth. Surely it is better now for all of us than it was 20,000 years ago when so much land was trapped beneath ice sheets. Perhaps any point between the recent climate and the extreme one we may be heading for, with tropical forests inside the arctic circle, is as good as any other. Maybe it’s even better with no ice caps anywhere. It doesn’t matter. The critical issue is not what the temperature is, or may be, or will be. The critical issue is how fast it is moving. Rapid change is the real danger. Human habits and infrastructure are suited to particular weather patterns and sea levels, as are ecosystems and animal behaviors. The rate at which global temperature is rising today is likely unique in the history of our species. This kind of sudden change is rare even in geological history, though perhaps not unprecedented. So the planet may have been through similar things before — that sounds reassuring, right? Not so much. Once you look at the impact similar changes had on biodiversity at the time, the existence of historical precedent becomes anything but reassuring. Rapid climate change is the prime suspect in most mass extinction events, including the Great Dying some 250 million years ago, in which 90% of all life went extinct. What we know about ecosystems, and what geologic history demonstrates, is that dramatic climate changes — up or down or sideways — are a tremendous shock to the biosphere and cause mass extinction events. That, all in all, is not likely to be a good thing.

This is not about me trying not to “loose (sic) intellectual points.” I posted a video I found interesting about Lindsey Graham. I posted a joke about HIM with it. To which you posted, and reposted, and reposted (acknowledge ME! Acknowledge Me!) with multiple juvenile insults and quips contained. I have stated and restated this same stuff before. I “get” your position, you obviously don’t get mine. That’s okay. People can disagree.

Not an outright lie and I did say in the post you quoted it could have been another member of this board. See above.

Sorry it was LRF. Someone I often disagree with but with whom we share a mutual respect (I think).

We have had this discussion before. As stated above, there is a distinction between global warming/climate change and man-made global warming. This is nothing new and I’m not changing anything. We’ve actually discussed this before (or I have with someone on this board). I’m not going to state the same things over and over (as I’ve explained above). So thanks for the “out” I guess lol. You can carry on but I’m not playing the beat the dead horse game any more than the childish insult game. And to a person on this board that I frequently disagree with (including in aspects of this topic), thanks for the text tonight. I won’t continue to “stoop” and I genuinely appreciate the kind words. Much respect.