That's enough out of you, Jig Boy!

What's a jig? Oh yeah, it's a weighted fly, I almost forgot.

Now, don't get all defensive.

You don't have to make 5 false casts before you can toss a jig and float.

That's like lifting a drink up to your mouth five times before you drink any......or passing the B five times before you hit it.

I agree totally, bro. Only need one cast with a spey rod, though. Load the rod with a d-loop and let her rip.

Well, one thing is for sure. Even if you're flinging feathers, you'll be having a waaaaay better time than I will be.

Enjoy yourselves up there.

Would you guys just leave already? SOL's like a rat on acid around here this week

Please don't feed him to the bears up there, and take some duct tape if he gets lippy with Mrs. TRBO

'cause Patron make grizz sick to his stomach

Translated: I'm an invaluable employee and replacing me would be impossible.

<insert puking gremlin here>

..........sooooo laughing

How does that song go?

"I'mmmmmmmmmmmm, gonna whip somebody'ssssssssssss assssssssssssssss,
I'mmmmmmmmmmmm, gonna whip somebody'ssssssssssss assssssssssssssss,

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, if ya don't leave me alonnnnnnnnnnne,
Ya better send me hommmmmmmmmmmme,
Cause I'mmmmmmmmmmmm, gonna whip somebody'ssssssssssss assssssssssssssss."



I gotta get outta here.

Sol,

please extend my regards to the lower potato patch.

. . . and how's your D-loop hangin' these days?

High and tight. All I need are some chrome-sided natives to play with. Three more days. Three.

Sol,

You guys have a great time. I sure miss that north country in September. I'd return in a heartbeat, but I've got precious memories of some relatively uncrowded waters. I'd hate to taint that picture.

Hope you don't have to stop and untangle Parker too often.

Will do.

I can barely imagine those rivers up there 20 years ago. I almost made my first trip as a 19-year old. Sure wish I'd have done it.

Sol,

I've got a copy of Fenelly's Steelhead Paradise about fishing the Skeena country in the 1950s with Buzz Fiorini if you want to borrow it some time. Fishing 9 1/2' E.C. Powell bamboo rods, Hardy St. Johns, and these newfangled plastic coated fly lines and nylon monofiliment leaders. High teener and 20# steelhead stacked like cordwood in Johansen Creek. Buzz is still alive and has fishing memories no one in my or your generation will ever know.

Hook one on a skater for me, will ya'?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

I just might take you up on that, salmo. Back when I was a hardcore fly guy I looked for that book and never could find a copy.

Skaters may have to come later in the week. I'm jonesin' for a fix, first.

Later bro.

Save your feathers, they keep your ears from saggin.

Ok, Its been awhile since Sol posted his challenge to khock, and I know he is probably out of town, but still I feel a need to answer his challenge. So, here I go...
Sol, The first thing I would like to point out is that I don't know of anywhere in the bible that incest is considered a sin. So, if you feel guilty or were admonished about something in your youth, it wasn't the act of incest that would of been the sin, but rather the act of having sex with someone that was not your life partner. If, we are to believe the biblical story, the risks associated with incest, ie. in-breeding and recessive chromosones, would not have been present, since the bodies would have been in a perfect or near perfect state. As sin entered man, then the body was corrupted and incest would have become more and more of a problem. If there was a commandment against incest, it would have had to do more with the dangers of it, rather than the actual act. I will leave it at that and let you respond.

Now, I would like to address your statement that the belief in God is illogical. In my opinion, the exact opposite is true. As science progresses, it is becoming more and more evident that God, in some form, must exist. This form is where most of the debate belongs, rather than than on his (its,her,etc. include) existance. If we look at the quark, we find subatomic particles that combine in different combinations to eventually create the very cells that you mention as being the start of life. If science is right, then inherent in each of these quarks is the basic laws of physics from which all mater forms. In essence, these quarks are your God. Since they most contain all the laws of physics within them, then within each of them is the ability to create everything that is and will be. They also have to be infinite in nature.
So, in my humble mind, it comes down to believing that an inanimate object, or objects, with no apparent form, knowledge, or ability to think created everything, or an animate object with knowledge started it all. Rather than just believing that all mater is, was, and always will be and that every thing is inherent in every thing, I choose to believe that the order of the universe was not and is not chaotic in order (and could not be unless we believe in a universe without the laws of physics) but rather was created by an animate, thinking being.

How I came to my personal beliefs in what form God takes are a whole different story and take a much longer path of discovery. The truth is Sol, you remind me a lot of the sceintists who keep getting excited about finding water or evidence of water in space. They insist that they are open minded and they are searching for life, but in reality they keep looking for life in the forms we know it. In essence, they say they believe in a universe of infinite possibilities but put restrictions on these possibilities at the same time. Any sceintist who says God can't exist, is denying the basic fundamental belief that most sceintific hypothesis are based on.

So Sol, while I am not very versed in sceince and physics, I am a deep thinker, a conservative christian, and a lover of debate. So, come at me with all you have, I may not have all the answers, but I certainly will try my best.
Hope you had a great trip, are nice and relaxed, and are up to taking a few shots at me.

1]Leviticus 18:6-18 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD. If you dont know the book you're preaching about then you really aren't that much of a christian.

2]In your opinion? According to your own people the fundamentalists, Science is all a big lie, and God exists in faith alone, (ie, you gotta believe it to see it, as opposed to vice-versa.) Would you care to share some details of this "scientific proof" of gods existance? If God were PROVEN to exist, since he exists in faith and faith alone, his proven existance would cause him to vanish in a puff of logic.

3]Riddle me this, Smartypants: What are quarks made of?
If Quarks are "God," does this mean that Leptons are Satan? And if Leptons are Satan, doesnt this mean that an Exorcism would cause a physical body to vanish into subatomic particles upon completion? Sounds an awful lot like Buddhism and the attainment of ultimate enlightenment.

4]Obviously you don't have a humble mind, or you wouldnt be here coming off as all knowing and all seeing like you are, but you are right about one thing, it all comes down to believing. Some people just can't function without convincing themselves that Daddy is up there on a cloud still holding thier hand.

5]You deny Entropy?? It goes against the laws of Physics? You yourself have rejected the laws of Science, but when you need to pull something out of your ass, you claim something goes against the laws of Physics? Entropy IS the laws of physics, and as a matter of fact is the foundation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which must've been conveniently left out of that Creationism class you had back in Home Schooling. Furthermore, it was proven over 100 years ago that all trajectories are unstable, in that all particle trajectories diverge exponentially from one-another, thereby *Proving* chaos not to be a faith, a myth, a fable, a fairy tale, or even a Reader's Digest Condensed Book, but a FACT.

6]Water is one of the most basic molecules you can find, and they've known about Ice in space for Centuries. What they get excited about of late is finding it in places they never thought to look such as under Lunar or Martian strata.

I know Im not Sol, but we both decended from the same Monkey, so I figured it'd be OK if I answered in his stead.

Itchy, I agree that I don't know the bible good enough. The fact is though, that Law was written after creation and written to combat sin. While I can't argue for all of the reasons of the law, much of it was written for benefit of man. In the biblical beliefs, Adam and his offspring would have been perfect at first, therefore negating the need of the law. But hey, I am just trying my best and like I said, I really do know I don't know everything. You already taught me one thing.

Arguement #2 in my opinion is a joke. God obviously does not exist in faith alone, in my opinion, but can only be found through faith at this time. In the future this will change.

Arguement #3
First of all my knowledge of quarks is very limited, but I thought that leptons were also quarks, aren't they. But I think you are jumping right past my arguement. Its not quarks that matter, but the fact that there are rules of physics that exist. What I really am trying to argue is that you place your faith in an inanimate object or objects have the innate ability to create things while I put mine in an animate one. Both take faith. Since science is seeming to come down to basic building blocks that through the innate laws that govern them and are with in them gave them the ability to act in certain ways that in the end created all we know,
I equate this your God. Since I find it hard to fathom that these things have been around forever and thereforth had to have had this ability forever I choose to beleive in an animate god. From there I take different paths to choose the GOd I believe in.
4. Trust me, The more you write, the more I know I don't know much. But agian, I am not trying to argue science as much as I am faith and whether or not a belief in God is essentially illogical. I certainly can't prove God and definitely can not argue against science. But You and Sol definitely seem to try to prove that Sceince proves God does not exist and that all belief in that is foolish. In that I beleive you fail.

5. Entropy? Sorry but you lost me here. I never took anything above physics and was not good at that at the time. I read a little on the subject and am lost in how I denied it, but then again, but then agian, for the most part I am just lost. Chaotic was a poor choice of words. My arguement is more philosophical than scientific. What was I was trying to say is that nothing is truely random. Even randomness must follow the rules of physics. These rules come from somewhere. Find what sets these rule in play and you have your god.
Lastly, why get excited about water in space? In an infinite universe you should be able to find life that takes all kinds of forms. It seems to me to focus on finding water limits the possibilities, the very basis of which these sceintists base their faith on. I know they are trying to say that they know life can exist with water so it may be more likely to exist, but since this life would have to take a very diffent form to exist in space, and thereforth came to being separately through separate acts of random actions, wouldn't they just as likely use a different building block? Its late and I know my ignorance is probably killing you, but I am trying.

I'm not really into arguing this, but would like to say simply that faith isn't about hoping or wanting (or not wanting) something to be true, but rather knowing it is. Despite my earnest efforts to disbelieve, I now do. I'm not sure how the whole thing works. It may well work more through attraction than promotion, but I got my answer and it just may be that some others will as well......when its time.

I doubt there are many old Doctors who are completely sold on science.