kpholmes Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 MSNBC.com ..... Is your next reference from ..... DailyKOS.com? PFT's opinion articles are garbage, but their news reporting is usually on par. Furthermore, (if you actually looked at the article before planning your next insult) Bob Glauber from Newsday made the initial report, who cites a league source. There's a reason a handful of the Giants' players have already stepped forward and said he will contribute nothing to the team, including leadership. And it it has nothing to do with the quality of my sources. I've not argued that Tiki wasn't treated the best when he was with the Giants - but the fact of the matter is, he quit. And he made a spectacle of it by announcing it mid-season. And once he was sitting in a comfortable broadcasting booth, he threw his old team under the bus - one person at a time, starting with Coughlin and Eli. If that's the kind of leadership you want on your team, be my guest. The fact of the matter is, Tiki is broke and looking for a paycheck. Not looking to win a championship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Here's what Antonio Pierce has to say on the matter. And keep in mind, while Pierce will never be a Hall of Fame candidate like Tiki, he was unquestionably a leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzkek Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 MSNBC.com ..... Is your next reference from ..... DailyKOS.com? Is Turf Smurf actually Tiki Barber? Very defensive talk for someone who's irrelevant and NOT going to make an impact on the football field again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 he's better the Beanie the weenie but i think hightower is safe......name the most famous Cardinal running back. emmit smith, hey where's my line ta clear the road, i'm famous Yer no Sweatness weak dick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt770 Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Tiki is a pathetic excuse for a human. He cheats on his 8-months pregnant wife and loses his gigs on Today and Football Night as a result (not that he added much to either show anyway), now he's going to try to play again at 36? He couldn't reek more of desperation if he tried. I hope no team even gives him a chance, but I'm sure one will. I predict there is no way in hell he makes a 53-man roster. I want to see Tiki standing next to Jamarcus Russell, begging for change, wearing nothing but a barrel. F'n reprobate dirtbag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Can I get Barry to come out of retirement too and get he and Herschel on my team? It'd be like playing Madden what those guys would do to these modern sissy ass defenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 he's better the Beanie the weenie but i think hightower is safe......name the most famous Cardinal running back. emmit smith, hey where's my line ta clear the road, i'm famous Yer no Sweatness weak dick Bah!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 I mean I'm sure he's in great physical shape and everything but C'mon 35 and out of football for years? Sounds like a desperate broke guy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Wonder if the Ex is mandating it? "What you mean there ain't no mo money. Get your arsh out the and play some football. Moma's gots some shoppin to do.". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt770 Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Wonder if the Ex is mandating it? "What you mean there ain't no mo money. Get your arsh out the and play some football. Moma's gots some shoppin to do.". I think you mean "Hey Tiki! Why you no pray footbar no more?! Ronde pray rong time! And Ronde no cheat! You reprobate dirtbag! Shrimp fried rice ten minute!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorcher Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Apparently Tiki has never heard of Michael Jordan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Walker claims he recently ran a 4.40 40. No joke... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turf Smurf Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 PFT's opinion articles are garbage, but their news reporting is usually on par. Furthermore, (if you actually looked at the article before planning your next insult) Bob Glauber from Newsday made the initial report, who cites a league source. Ya'll are way to easy to get riled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turf Smurf Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Ya'll are way to easy to get riled. I laugh at you because I spend most of my time in this: " C is the speed of light in a vacuum, and it is constant by DEFINITION! So it's ridiculous to question whether it is constant. However, he seems to be questioning whether our line of sight to distant galaxies is truly a vacuum. We can see the diffraction of light in our atmosphere, but just barely. As far as we can tell, intergalactic space is millions of times less dense than our atmosphere. It is unlikely that intergalactic gas significantly affects our view. Gravity lensing can be seen in a number of directions, but those represent a small fraction of the big picture. The main reason we don't know where galaxies are is because we have no accurate way to cross check the redshift data. Type Ia supernovas give only a rought estimate of distance, and redshift due to local motion cannot be distinguished from redshift due to expansion of space. And, of course, we have no way to detect motion perpendicular to our line of sight. In my own model, expansion of space enlarges the cosmic voids (bubbles), increasing the distance between adjacent galaxies. We don't really know what forces maintain the integrity of the walls of galaxies surrounding those bubbles. I postulate that those walls of galaxies can be stretched only so far before they pop. When a bubble wall pops, first a gap opens near the middle. Then the galaxies around the gap feel a stronger pull away from the gap and toward the surrounding clusters. After a billion or so years, the galaxies of the ruptured wall collide with the surrounding clusters. The energy and momentum of those galaxies is conserved by radiating pressure waves thru the cosmos. Those pressure waves are the dark energy of the next larger-scale universe. Our dark energy comes from popping bubbles in the cosmic foam of the next smaller-scale universe. We should see many popping bubble walls in our 3D map of the universe. The galaxies on the near side of a popping wall are moving toward us relative to comoving space; the far side is moving away. This makes the near side appear closer than it is, and the far side farther than it is. Unfortunately, we cannot verify that those walls are popping because we merely interpret redshift as proportional to distance. The SDSS map is a map of redshift, and we pretend that it is a map of distance. " But you're the man dude.....rock on.....hard to talk smack on this level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 I laugh at you because I spend most of my time in this:" C is the speed of light in a vacuum, and it is constant by DEFINITION! So it's ridiculous to question whether it is constant. However, he seems to be questioning whether our line of sight to distant galaxies is truly a vacuum. We can see the diffraction of light in our atmosphere, but just barely. As far as we can tell, intergalactic space is millions of times less dense than our atmosphere. It is unlikely that intergalactic gas significantly affects our view. Gravity lensing can be seen in a number of directions, but those represent a small fraction of the big picture. The main reason we don't know where galaxies are is because we have no accurate way to cross check the redshift data. Type Ia supernovas give only a rought estimate of distance, and redshift due to local motion cannot be distinguished from redshift due to expansion of space. And, of course, we have no way to detect motion perpendicular to our line of sight. In my own model, expansion of space enlarges the cosmic voids (bubbles), increasing the distance between adjacent galaxies. We don't really know what forces maintain the integrity of the walls of galaxies surrounding those bubbles. I postulate that those walls of galaxies can be stretched only so far before they pop. When a bubble wall pops, first a gap opens near the middle. Then the galaxies around the gap feel a stronger pull away from the gap and toward the surrounding clusters. After a billion or so years, the galaxies of the ruptured wall collide with the surrounding clusters. The energy and momentum of those galaxies is conserved by radiating pressure waves thru the cosmos. Those pressure waves are the dark energy of the next larger-scale universe. Our dark energy comes from popping bubbles in the cosmic foam of the next smaller-scale universe. We should see many popping bubble walls in our 3D map of the universe. The galaxies on the near side of a popping wall are moving toward us relative to comoving space; the far side is moving away. This makes the near side appear closer than it is, and the far side farther than it is. Unfortunately, we cannot verify that those walls are popping because we merely interpret redshift as proportional to distance. The SDSS map is a map of redshift, and we pretend that it is a map of distance. " But you're the man dude.....rock on.....hard to talk smack on this level. Backdoor bragging about however smart you think you are will get you nowhere on these message boards, you should know better than that. Look, all you have to do is man up and admit it - you tried to stir the pot and it backfired. Copying and pasting your research paper in an attempt to show off whatever it is you do outside of fantasy football isn't going to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 I laugh at you because I spend most of my time in this: " C is the speed of light in a vacuum, and it is constant by DEFINITION! So it's ridiculous to question whether it is constant. However, he seems to be questioning whether our line of sight to distant galaxies is truly a vacuum. We can see the diffraction of light in our atmosphere, but just barely. As far as we can tell, intergalactic space is millions of times less dense than our atmosphere. It is unlikely that intergalactic gas significantly affects our view. Gravity lensing can be seen in a number of directions, but those represent a small fraction of the big picture. The main reason we don't know where galaxies are is because we have no accurate way to cross check the redshift data. Type Ia supernovas give only a rought estimate of distance, and redshift due to local motion cannot be distinguished from redshift due to expansion of space. And, of course, we have no way to detect motion perpendicular to our line of sight. In my own model, expansion of space enlarges the cosmic voids (bubbles), increasing the distance between adjacent galaxies. We don't really know what forces maintain the integrity of the walls of galaxies surrounding those bubbles. I postulate that those walls of galaxies can be stretched only so far before they pop. When a bubble wall pops, first a gap opens near the middle. Then the galaxies around the gap feel a stronger pull away from the gap and toward the surrounding clusters. After a billion or so years, the galaxies of the ruptured wall collide with the surrounding clusters. The energy and momentum of those galaxies is conserved by radiating pressure waves thru the cosmos. Those pressure waves are the dark energy of the next larger-scale universe. Our dark energy comes from popping bubbles in the cosmic foam of the next smaller-scale universe. We should see many popping bubble walls in our 3D map of the universe. The galaxies on the near side of a popping wall are moving toward us relative to comoving space; the far side is moving away. This makes the near side appear closer than it is, and the far side farther than it is. Unfortunately, we cannot verify that those walls are popping because we merely interpret redshift as proportional to distance. The SDSS map is a map of redshift, and we pretend that it is a map of distance. " But you're the man dude.....rock on.....hard to talk smack on this level. You seem to be confused about cosmology and cosmetology. From what I've seen, I think you'd do much better addressing your expertise in the latter rather than the former... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajfalcone Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) This Turf Smurf reminds me of another guy at a free forum site, which I wont give satisfaction of remembering his name if indeed it is. All he did was annoy and pester with loser comments and he fed on it because of anonymity. Atleast here we have mods to take care of business. Edited March 10, 2011 by ajfalcone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 You seem to be confused about cosmology and cosmetology. From what I've seen, I think you'd do much better addressing your expertise in the latter rather than the former... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorcher Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 I wonder if Tiki Barber is the speed of light in a vacuum? I'm just trying to correlate things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 I wonder if Tiki Barber still owns a vacuum? I'm just trying to correlate things. Fixed to about where I think he is financially. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Fixed to about where I think he is financially. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Fixed to about where I think he is financially. I got the impression when he retired, that he thought the media world was in love with him. He was on Fox and Friends and lovin' it, but then he admits cheating on his wife, which probably all but ended his stint at NBC or FOX or wherever wanted to hire the guy. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2...l_there_be.html I could see him playing in Tampa with Ronde, who I think just signed a 1-yr deal. Tampa could let Cadillac Williams go and sign Tiki Barber. Edited March 10, 2011 by Scooby's Hubby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Tampa could let Cadillac Williams go and sign Tiki Barber. TB appears serious about building a contender. They are putting a bunch of very talented young pieces together. Why in the Seven Hells would they want a washed-up locker room cancer, especially instead of Caddy? Edited March 10, 2011 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Tiki wants to restart his career in Pittsburgh Yeah, and I want to start my career as a wide receiver in Green Bay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 You seem to be confused about cosmology and cosmetology. From what I've seen, I think you'd do much better addressing your expertise in the latter rather than the former... Wow, that was an awesome comment right there. Perfect! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.