George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium

[pate]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF86l4jDTtk

au jus a pense...

[21st Century Man]

I'm really tempted to turn the damn radio off and continue reading a bio on Russia's Catherine The Great.  Catherine the Great or "King" George the Oaf.

[pate]

One might miss the stuggle to bee keeng..

[pate]

props to the gheist for sticking around through the "open lies" of cullz... is this JC?

[pate]

FOODLION!! WE MISS YEW!

[pate]

true story...

[pate]

whois paul?

[pate]

troo scientist...

[21st Century Man]

Sunny seems to be a real ditzy broad.  No offense to any of the skirts here.

[pate]

jorch cullzb out prank gheists...

[pate]

tis is neu JC

[21st Century Man]

Dammit, Bogie. I'm not in the mood to channel right now!

[pate]

last thyme I had a problem writhing 'round...

[pate]

DAve: ten mins or less OTA...

[pate]

Thought experiment on tonight's gheist?  WQell, that'd be mean (as in average)

[pate]

thank Bill fer l;shening on SW...

[pate]

heh

[pate]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7NmUS7UWNQ

[pate]

I doan have that many 3x5's quickly...

[pate]

Ima perfesh, perfresh, perfunctional boredcaster...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq4nR0iTFXE

[21st Century Man]

Well, that was an utter waste of an hour and a half.

[pate]

Time wasted cam never be recoverd...

[136 or 142]

So fiat money is bad because it's backed by nothing but confidence, but gold backed money is good. This raises one obvious question: what, besides confidence, makes gold valuable as either a currency or as a backer of currency?

I mean I know it has a handful of industrial purposes and it's largely non reactive making it sort of 'pure' but its mostly had great value throughout history for its ornamental purposes.  This strikes me as hardly anything to base a currency around.

This is, of course, aside from the many practical arguments against using the gold standard and, the fact that, once inflation was fully wrestled to the ground in the late 1980s it has been remarkably stable at around 2% per annum while the inflation rates fluctuated wildly during the periods of the gold standard when there was no central bank.

I don't know why there are a handful of seemingly intelligent people who still favor a return to the gold standard.  Of course, there are far more charlatans or fools who propose it, such as last night's guest.

[wr250]

Pate, easy on the Scotch.  I'm having a hard time deciphering some of your posts.

hes just speaking in noory, thats all.

[pate]

So fiat money is bad because it's backed by nothing but confidence, but gold backed money is good. This raises one obvious question: what, besides confidence, makes gold valuable as either a currency or as a backer of currency?

I mean I know it has a handful of industrial purposes and it's largely non reactive making it sort of 'pure' but its mostly had great value throughout history for its ornamental purposes.  This strikes me as hardly anything to base a currency around.

This is, of course, aside from the many practical arguments against using the gold standard and, the fact that, once inflation was fully wrestled to the ground in the late 1980s it has been remarkably stable at around 2% per annum while the inflation rates fluctuated wildly during the periods of the gold standard when there was no central bank.

I don't know why there are a handful of seemingly intelligent people who still favor a return to the gold standard.  Of course, there are far more charlatans or fools who propose it, such as last night's guest.

Yw (correctLoL: Yew) were lishunnen>?

Hah, correct answer wuz?>:  "Nope"

GNS

[pate]

So fiat money is bad because it's backed by nothing but confidence, but gold backed money is good. This raises one obvious question: what, besides confidence, makes gold valuable as either a currency or as a backer of currency?

I mean I know it has a handful of industrial purposes and it's largely non reactive making it sort of 'pure' but its mostly had great value throughout history for its ornamental purposes.  This strikes me as hardly anything to base a currency around.

This is, of course, aside from the many practical arguments against using the gold standard and, the fact that, once inflation was fully wrestled to the ground in the late 1980s it has been remarkably stable at around 2% per annum while the inflation rates fluctuated wildly during the periods of the gold standard when there was no central bank.

I don't know why there are a handful of seemingly intelligent people who still favor a return to the gold standard.  Of course, there are far more charlatans or fools who propose it, such as last night's guest.

All, tricks aside, this was for the "Ppel Ticks" thered?

GN: Sumthin's goin' on. (?!, end script) WELL BESHART IMUN...

{off air} GN:  Tommee, does my shart taste like toomeric?

[Kojiro]

So fiat money is bad because it's backed by nothing but confidence, but gold backed money is good. This raises one obvious question: what, besides confidence, makes gold valuable as either a currency or as a backer of currency?

I mean I know it has a handful of industrial purposes and it's largely non reactive making it sort of 'pure' but its mostly had great value throughout history for its ornamental purposes.  This strikes me as hardly anything to base a currency around.

http://sciengsustainability.blogspot.com/2013/05/why-is-gold-so-valuable.html

Summarized: 1) It's pretty. 2) It's easy to work with and lasts. 3) It's very rare.

[albrecht]

So fiat money is bad because it's backed by nothing but confidence, but gold backed money is good. This raises one obvious question: what, besides confidence, makes gold valuable as either a currency or as a backer of currency?

I mean I know it has a handful of industrial purposes and it's largely non reactive making it sort of 'pure' but its mostly had great value throughout history for its ornamental purposes.  This strikes me as hardly anything to base a currency around.

This is, of course, aside from the many practical arguments against using the gold standard and, the fact that, once inflation was fully wrestled to the ground in the late 1980s it has been remarkably stable at around 2% per annum while the inflation rates fluctuated wildly during the periods of the gold standard when there was no central bank.

I don't know why there are a handful of seemingly intelligent people who still favor a return to the gold standard.  Of course, there are far more charlatans or fools who propose it, such as last night's guest.

Because it is relatively rare, is malleable but not too soft, and lasts a long time. In addition to more rare modern usages you mentioned. (The fact that it is not useful for ordinary life, manufacturing, etc is actually a "plus" for use as a currency, or basis for it.) The 'bad' side of gold is the same scarcity and complaints of less availability/credit (hence some like silver, especially in rural areas or due to the potentiallly more investment available.)
ps: it is hard to use simply the US dollar as the reason pro/con for a gold (or silver) standard as other fiat currencies see way more fluctuations and people/investors/countries tend to flee to the dollar as it is (at least for now) seen as stable and people accept the 'full faith & credit' of the US (at least for now.)
-GNS
What would C2C be like if Blavatsky never wrote her stuff? Are there any guests left who don't believe in the bs of ascended master, vibrations, frequencies, etc?

[Toxic Fluid]

All this nitpicking is unnecessary.  What are you doing?  Are you hanging on every word waiting for a slip of the tongue so you can rag on George some more?  How moronically anal can you get?  Art will be back in a short while.  When he does we can expect the same quality shows he is noted for.  Art's presentation is unique and he uses his voice well; that's given.  Coast to coast present listeners will switch in droves once Art's show resumes.  There is no reason, out side of some mean spirited motivation to continually niggle, nitpick and bash George Norry.  He has actually done Art a service by maintaining the audience base for him until his return.  Think about it; if the Coast to Coast show dispersed after Art left; it would mean he would have to start over from scratch.  This way, the way it is now, is perfect for Art.  The audience base is waiting for him.  You guys should be thanking George for keeping the spirit alive for Art's return.
Now, isn't that a better perspective?  Stop the mean nitpicking CRAP children.
Did you like my toxic fluid?  I'll give you another sip later when I think you need a dose.

[Kojiro]

What would C2C be like if Blavatsky never wrote her stuff? Are there any guests left who don't believe in the bs of ascended master, vibrations, frequencies, etc?

Seth Shostak, Phil Plait and Michio Kaku still make occasional appearances don't they?