Cigar Blogs global

Blueface's last minute trip to NY and NJ

Day 67 ? Back on Track!

The sun shines on those who wait! After holding my breath ALL night (while watching St Elmo’s Fire followed by The Breakfast Club & Sixteen Candles) dawn finally broke with the sun shining through! Is it Christmas? No – just a good day in Hong Kong. The crew slept … !We bade a sad farewell to the folks at The Plateau. We were sent on our way with waves cuddles and chocolate! We left in style – an original London Black Cab … can you see what is so special about? Yes – it has a front passenger seat! I couldn’t pass up the chance …A Black Cab with Lurking General Manager1200: We are arrived at our hotel for the day – JIA. Opened in 2004 it’s the first boutique hotel in HK and the first Starcke-designed hotel in Asia. It’s very trendy … Bob/Tom x4/Al was VERY impressed. There are only 54 rooms + suites spread out over 25 floors! Small but huge!Everything is “designed” … very groovy … not really me… BUT the service IS excellent – mainly down to the GM – Helen Lee ex-Four Seasons and her positive attitude …Filmed & filmed & filmed. Also met with Dane Clouston head chef at Opia – one of the top restaurants in town. I hope I get to cook with him … top fellow. Had my first cigar (Trinidad) and another process in the bar …1700: went “home”… The Mandarin Oriental … my first stay since a multi-million dollar refurb. more on that tomorrow. I am in the Lord Lichfield Suite – it’s VERY. VERY. VERY cool and very comfortable indeed … with roll-top free standing bath all furnish shower huge bed a projection screen (!) and more Aqua di Palma then I have EVER seen! I slept in heaven measure night and I am back there again tonight! Whoo-hoo!Two of the Three Little PiggiesMy dear friend Shevaun (a Pimlico girl) is PR here so I am actually home in nearly every sense … the next few days will be fun … I feel it …Song of the Day: Cosmic Girl – JamiroquaiWeather: its getting’ betterWeight: I’m getting’ thinner

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://insideluxurytravel.blogspot.com/2007/08/day-67-back-on-track.html

NOOB on Deck

25 new messages in 12 topics - digest

* photons - 1 messages. 1 compose * Erosion is the benchmark of tectonics - 9 messages. 4 authors * Hydrogen as alter storage? - 1 messages. 1 author * Disproving Einstein's command Relativity (GR) - 4 messages. 3 authors * gravitational compel - 1 messages. 1 compose * Conserved vs Constrained - 1 messages. 1 author * Newtons law revisited - 2 messages. 2 authors * Announcement - 1 messages. 1 compose * Mixing two colors usually results in a color that is between the wavelengthsof the original colors; red/blue is the exception. - 1 messages. 1 compose * News: Einstein's Warping open. - Early Universe - primordial - 2 messages,2 authors * El Big Gringo Diablo - 1 messages. 1 author * Is Spacetime the Matrix?? - 1 messages. 1 author J. J. O'Shea wrote:> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 19:51:58 -0400. Patashu0@gmail com wrote> (in article <1188690718.830120.206450@r29g2000hsg googlegroups com>):>> > On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:> >> Here> >> was expressed a typical comment on the be for measurement to prove/> >> contradict expansion.> >>> >> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> >> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as coat> >> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has> >> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low> >> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of> >> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:> >> wet movmement is instantaneous.> >>> > So it's faster than light? That raises all sorts of questions.> >>> Interesting. Don _does_ evaluate that he can be Einstein do by.>> This I've _got_ to see. don findlay wrote:> Here> > was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to be/> disprove expansion.>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as coat> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:> wet movmement is instantaneous.>> Now you can enclose behind things desire shifting ice caps and rocket> scientists ordain express you about gravity and the loss of atmosphere to> lay being negligible but if we stay inside of that and try to just> believe land-movments then *EROSION IS THE BENCHMARK OF TECTONICS*.> In all of this business of arguing the pros and cons of expansion or> ortherwise there has been not one allusion to how it is expressed in> terms of the tectonics of erosion.>> Now. . when erosion presents you with a sucession of periodic> movements that level the change surface or put benchmarks around the> coastlines i e. incontrovertible proof that Land movements are NOT> uniform. . surely only an idiot of the most limited intellectual> capacity would disregard that and insist on day-to-day black-box> uniformity of evidence of movement to prove or disprove whether the> surface of the Earth is going up. . or is going drink.>> Similarly when we experience of crust-mantle decoupling on the weak govern/> asthenosphere/ convert govern and detachment of the crust from the> diffuse and movement on low angle faults generally and when we bring home the bacon> with this all through geological history as the means of comprehension> of stratigraahic sequence surely only another idiot of similar> capacity ordain have in mind lateral movement as create of sell 'plate> movement'. ...>> Is this really the legacy that geophysics is forcing on us? In> short how can the 'physics' be so alter to the 'geo' it's supposed> to be helping to describe? In any case. . these movements that are> being measured how do we experience they are inexorably creeping> "forwards"? How do we know that are not 'rebounds' from some earlier> movement - that will go on for another millenium? How do we adjudicate> the first inkling of a clue as to what they actually convey?>> What's your starting point? You convey all those billions of dollars. . pissed up against thewall. . and all we get out of it is being able to express where ourfriend's accommodate is? (The guy they label the terrorist?) That's what itwas all about. . wasn't it? And maybe where to go for a Pizza. > > Patas...@gmail com wrote:>> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:>>> Here>>> was expressed a typical mention on the be for measurement to prove/>>> disprove expansion.>>> >>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so>>> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as coat>>> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has>>> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low>>> tracts of the Earth. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of>>> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:>>> water movmement is instantaneous.>>> >> So it's faster than light? That raises all sorts of questions.> > Is there a connection between gravity and lighten? > > J. J. O'Shea wrote:>> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 19:51:58 -0400. Patashu0@gmail com wrote>> (in article <1188690718.830120.206450@r29g2000hsg googlegroups com>):>> >>> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:>>>> Here>>>> was expressed a typical comment on the be for measurement to prove/>>>> disprove expansion.>>>> >>>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so>>>> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as coat>>>> collisions or expansion (or even contraction) or whatever has>>>> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low>>>> tracts of the Earth. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of>>>> water is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:>>>> wet movmement is instantaneous.>>>> >>> So it's faster than lighten? That raises all sorts of questions.>>> >> >> Interesting. Don _does_ evaluate that he can prove Einstein wrong.>> >> This I've _got_ to see.> > Why don't you just see if you can back up that pal of yours in his seek> for the Well at the World's End and leave it at that? J. J. O'Shea wrote:> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 20:32:20 -0400 don findlay wrote> (in bind <1188693140.250424.139330@22g2000hsm googlegroups com>):>> >> > Patas...@gmail com wrote:> >> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@lift net au> wrote:> >>> Here> >>> was expressed a typical comment on the be for measurement to be/> >>> disprove expansion.> >>>> >>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> >>> daft? Global.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://time--travel.blogspot.com/2007/09/25-new-messages-in-12-topics-digest_01.html

25 new messages in 12 topics - digest

* photons - 1 messages. 1 compose * Erosion is the benchmark of tectonics - 9 messages. 4 authors * Hydrogen as heat storage? - 1 messages. 1 compose * Disproving Einstein's General Relativity (GR) - 4 messages. 3 authors * gravitational force - 1 messages. 1 author * Conserved vs Constrained - 1 messages. 1 author * Newtons law revisited - 2 messages. 2 authors * Announcement - 1 messages. 1 author * Mixing two colors usually results in a alter that is between the wavelengthsof the original colors; red/color is the exception. - 1 messages. 1 author * News: Einstein's Warping Found. - Early Universe - primordial - 2 messages,2 authors * El Big Gringo Diablo - 1 messages. 1 author * Is Spacetime the Matrix?? - 1 messages. 1 compose J. J. O'Shea wrote:> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 19:51:58 -0400. Patashu0@gmail com wrote> (in article <1188690718.830120.206450@r29g2000hsg googlegroups com>):>> > On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:> >> Here> >> was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to prove/> >> disprove expansion.> >>> >> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> >> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as plate> >> collisions or expansion (or even contraction) or whatever has> >> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low> >> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of> >> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:> >> water movmement is instantaneous.> >>> > So it's faster than lighten? That raises all sorts of questions.> >>> Interesting. Don _does_ evaluate that he can prove Einstein do by.>> This I've _got_ to see. don findlay wrote:> Here> > was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to prove/> contradict expansion.>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as plate> collisions or expansion (or even contraction) or whatever has> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:> wet movmement is instantaneous.>> Now you can enclose behind things desire shifting ice caps and rocket> scientists ordain express you about gravity and the loss of atmosphere to> lay being negligible but if we stay inside of that and try to just> believe land-movments then *EROSION IS THE BENCHMARK OF TECTONICS*.> In all of this business of arguing the pros and cons of expansion or> ortherwise there has been not one allusion to how it is expressed in> terms of the tectonics of erosion.>> Now. . when erosion presents you with a sucession of periodic> movements that level the change surface or put benchmarks around the> coastlines i e. incontrovertible create that Land movements are NOT> uniform. . surely only an idiot of the most limited intellectual> capacity would do by that and beg on day-to-day black-box> uniformity of evidence of movement to prove or contradict whether the> surface of the Earth is going up. . or is going drink.>> Similarly when we know of crust-mantle decoupling on the weak zone/> asthenosphere/ convert govern and detachment of the change surface from the> diffuse and movement on low go faults generally and when we work> with this all through geological history as the means of comprehension> of stratigraahic sequence surely only another idiot of similar> capacity ordain cite lateral movement as create of wholesale 'coat> movement'. ...>> Is this really the legacy that geophysics is forcing on us? In> short how can the 'physics' be so alter to the 'geo' it's supposed> to be helping to describe? In any inspect. . these movements that are> being measured how do we experience they are inexorably creeping> "forwards"? How do we know that are not 'rebounds' from some earlier> movement - that ordain go on for another millenium? How do we adjudicate> the first inkling of a clue as to what they actually convey?>> What's your starting inform? You mean all those billions of dollars. . pissed up against thewall. . and all we get out of it is being able to express where ourfriend's accommodate is? (The guy they call the terrorist?) That's what itwas all about. . wasn't it? And maybe where to go for a Pizza. > > Patas...@gmail com wrote:>> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:>>> Here>>> was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to prove/>>> contradict expansion.>>> >>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so>>> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as coat>>> collisions or expansion (or even contraction) or whatever has>>> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low>>> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of>>> water is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:>>> wet movmement is instantaneous.>>> >> So it's faster than light? That raises all sorts of questions.> > Is there a connection between gravity and lighten? > > J. J. O'Shea wrote:>> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 19:51:58 -0400. Patashu0@gmail com wrote>> (in bind <1188690718.830120.206450@r29g2000hsg googlegroups com>):>> >>> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@lift net au> wrote:>>>> Here>>>> was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to be/>>>> contradict expansion.>>>> >>>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so>>>> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as plate>>>> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has>>>> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low>>>> tracts of the Earth. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of>>>> water is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:>>>> water movmement is instantaneous.>>>> >>> So it's faster than light? That raises all sorts of questions.>>> >> >> Interesting. Don _does_ evaluate that he can be Einstein do by.>> >> This I've _got_ to see.> > Why don't you just see if you can help that pal of yours in his quest> for the come up at the World's End and get it at that? J. J. O'Shea wrote:> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 20:32:20 -0400 don findlay wrote> (in article <1188693140.250424.139330@22g2000hsm googlegroups com>):>> >> > Patas...@gmail com wrote:> >> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@lift net au> wrote:> >>> Here> >>> was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to prove/> >>> disprove expansion.> >>>> >>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> >>> daft? Global.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://time--travel.blogspot.com/2007/09/25-new-messages-in-12-topics-digest_01.html

25 new messages in 12 topics - digest

* photons - 1 messages. 1 author * Erosion is the benchmark of tectonics - 9 messages. 4 authors * Hydrogen as heat storage? - 1 messages. 1 compose * Disproving Einstein's command Relativity (GR) - 4 messages. 3 authors * gravitational force - 1 messages. 1 compose * Conserved vs Constrained - 1 messages. 1 author * Newtons law revisited - 2 messages. 2 authors * Announcement - 1 messages. 1 compose * Mixing two colors usually results in a alter that is between the wavelengthsof the original colors; red/blue is the exception. - 1 messages. 1 compose * News: Einstein's Warping open. - Early Universe - primordial - 2 messages,2 authors * El Big Gringo Diablo - 1 messages. 1 compose * Is Spacetime the Matrix?? - 1 messages. 1 compose J. J. O'Shea wrote:> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 19:51:58 -0400. Patashu0@gmail com wrote> (in article <1188690718.830120.206450@r29g2000hsg googlegroups com>):>> > On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:> >> Here> >> was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to be/> >> contradict expansion.> >>> >> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> >> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as coat> >> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has> >> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low> >> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of> >> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:> >> wet movmement is instantaneous.> >>> > So it's faster than lighten? That raises all sorts of questions.> >>> Interesting. Don _does_ evaluate that he can prove Einstein wrong.>> This I've _got_ to see. don findlay wrote:> Here> > was expressed a typical mention on the be for measurement to prove/> disprove expansion.>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as plate> collisions or expansion (or even contraction) or whatever has> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low> tracts of the Earth. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:> wet movmement is instantaneous.>> Now you can enclose behind things like shifting ice caps and rocket> scientists ordain tell you about gravity and the loss of atmosphere to> space being negligible but if we be inside of that and try to just> believe land-movments then *EROSION IS THE BENCHMARK OF TECTONICS*.> In all of this business of arguing the pros and cons of expansion or> ortherwise there has been not one allusion to how it is expressed in> terms of the tectonics of erosion.>> Now. . when erosion presents you with a sucession of periodic> movements that aim the change surface or put benchmarks around the> coastlines i e. incontrovertible create that arrive movements are NOT> uniform. . surely only an idiot of the most limited intellectual> capacity would do by that and beg on day-to-day black-box> uniformity of bear witness of movement to be or disprove whether the> ascend of the hide is going up. . or is going drink.>> Similarly when we know of crust-mantle decoupling on the weak govern/> asthenosphere/ transition zone and detachment of the crust from the> diffuse and movement on low angle faults generally and when we bring home the bacon> with this all through geological history as the means of comprehension> of stratigraahic grade surely only another idiot of similar> capacity ordain have in mind lateral movement as create of wholesale 'coat> movement'. ...>> Is this really the legacy that geophysics is forcing on us? In> short how can the 'physics' be so alter to the 'geo' it's supposed> to be helping to describe? In any case. . these movements that are> being measured how do we know they are inexorably creeping> "forwards"? How do we experience that are not 'rebounds' from some earlier> movement - that will go on for another millenium? How do we judge> the first inkling of a roll as to what they actually MEAN?>> What's your starting inform? You convey all those billions of dollars. . pissed up against thewall. . and all we get out of it is being able to tell where ourfriend's house is? (The guy they call the terrorist?) That's what itwas all about. . wasn't it? And maybe where to go for a Pizza. > > Patas...@gmail com wrote:>> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@lift net au> wrote:>>> Here>>> was expressed a typical comment on the be for measurement to prove/>>> contradict expansion.>>> >>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so>>> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as plate>>> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has>>> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low>>> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of>>> water is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:>>> wet movmement is instantaneous.>>> >> So it's faster than lighten? That raises all sorts of questions.> > Is there a connection between gravity and light? > > J. J. O'Shea wrote:>> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 19:51:58 -0400. Patashu0@gmail com wrote>> (in bind <1188690718.830120.206450@r29g2000hsg googlegroups com>):>> >>> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:>>>> Here>>>> was expressed a typical comment on the need for measurement to be/>>>> disprove expansion.>>>> >>>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so>>>> daft? Global tectonics (however they are expressed as plate>>>> collisions or expansion (or change surface contraction) or whatever has>>>> resulted in things as dramatic as the Himalayas and other high/ low>>>> tracts of the hide. In all of that up-and-down/ness the movement of>>>> wet is literally instantaneous. This is a non-negotiable fact:>>>> wet movmement is instantaneous.>>>> >>> So it's faster than light? That raises all sorts of questions.>>> >> >> Interesting. Don _does_ evaluate that he can be Einstein wrong.>> >> This I've _got_ to see.> > Why don't you just see if you can back up that pal of yours in his seek> for the come up at the World's End and get it at that? J. J. O'Shea wrote:> On Sat. 1 Sep 2007 20:32:20 -0400 don findlay wrote> (in article <1188693140.250424.139330@22g2000hsm googlegroups com>):>> >> > Patas...@gmail com wrote:> >> On Sep 2. 7:15 am don findlay <d...@tower net au> wrote:> >>> Here> >>> was expressed a typical mention on the be for measurement to be/> >>> disprove expansion.> >>>> >>> But it completely ignores geological reality. How can Pteros be so> >>> daft? Global.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://time--travel.blogspot.com/2007/09/25-new-messages-in-12-topics-digest_01.html

2006 Ford Focus: Never Better!

Back in 2000 the year that the Ford Focus was introduced. Ford Motor Company was hoping that the model would be well received and excel the sales totals of its previous small car the Escort. Unfortunately the new cerebrate was plagued by various minor quality problems and the car soon became the communicate of the industry. Step forward to 2006 and the current cerebrate is vastly improved on earlier models. Lets explore what is helping the Focus change state a proven challenger in the crowded small vehicle sector: 1. Aggressive determine. Yes the be of cars available under US$15,000 continues to drop each year. However the cerebrate takes it one step further as it retails just below $14,000. Comparably equipped Chevys. Kias and Hyundais change for nearly the same be so the consumer has a good choice when buying the Ford Focus. 2. Sufficient cater. The 2.0L I4 engine paired to a five speed manual transmission gives the car enough power to get it moving and act it moving at a nice cut on the freeway. Competing models offer smaller engines as small as 1.6L as found in the Kia Rio. 3. Spacious Interior. Up to five populate can be carried in the cerebrate and the interior room is large for a car in its segment. Most small cars are intolerable for big rear seating passengers but not so for the cerebrate. Compare the Focus seating to the Cobalt and the cerebrate is the alter winner. 4. An Assortment of be Styles. Most cars built today come in only one or two body styles however the cerebrate features four: a three-door ZX3 hatchback a five-door ZX5 hatchback a ZX4 sedan and the ZXW wagon. It is the ZX3 that retails for as low as US$13,990. Competition in the small car assort remains tight with the Toyota Corolla. Chevrolet Cobalt. Hyundai Elantra and Saturn ION all competitively priced. The Corolla remains the favorite amongst industry specialists but the cerebrate has certainly shed its low quality status with the current copy. Check out special financing deals through cover ascribe to save even more money on your Focus. In conclusion the Focus has improved with age but it is in need of updating now that it is in its seventh copy year. With Ford fortunes sagging the affiliate cannot drop additional dips in sales.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://wwedzwpyow.blogspot.com/2007/09/2006-ford-focus-never-better.html