Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NorCalAndrew

  1. Here in Northern California we have a water park called "Waterworks Park" and it has a total of 8 slides. One of them is a "raging river" style slide where you ride on a raft. This continues to be probably the most insane raging river ride I have ever experienced. I'm not sure I can embed the video I have of it (it's on the waterpark's website).




    Waterworks also has a tower with 3 body slides that feature something interesting i've never seen before either. They have "boosters" on them that feature a 4 foot by maybe 1 1/2 foot tube that fills with water. Then when it's your turn to go, the op hits a pedal and the water empties out and pushes you along the slide. Has anybody else seen this before on body slides?

  2. ^I think the flume-in-flume thing is more like a small slide that has a drop into a much wider trough, so that boat rocks from one end of the large portion to the other as it goes through the course (which looks like it could be incredible).


    I didn't think it was possible to love S&S any more... until I saw those new trains. I'm also dying to ride those looping slides.


    The large tube is the Mega Tube. I believe the "flume in flume" is different than the mega tube (though possibly related).


    Flume-in-Flume just means that the flume has a large enough diameter to allow for another slide to pass through it. Much like the picture shows, a piece of green slide inside of the bigger one. I however, don't understand how this could be achieved from a support standpoint.


    Not at all.


    I'm actually really attracted to fem guys.


    Most people don't look at me and think "gay" when they see me.


    Don't get me wrong, I have my gurrrrl moments but usually not unless I'm around close friends.


    I try to be open-minded and respect everyone despite our differences. I accept everyone. Even gun toting conservatives and trannies.


    I wish the gay community as a whole was filled with more people like you. I'm sick and tired of all the gay people who constantly discriminate against their own type.

  4. Perhaps it's a 'Drifting Coaster'. The Drifting Coaster was featured on RCT3 Wild!

    But it has inversions so it couldn't be a drifter. The track is black so I think it would look similar to Rock N Rollercoaster!


    The drifting coaster is a pipe dream. So is the splitting coaster. Imagine what would really happen if the coaster drifted over to one side in a high speed turn and went WHACK. That would be painful.


    The track's probably dark to blend in with the terrain.


    Is the drifting coaster a dream? Because I feel like Premier has a prototype ready to go.



    Aren't Tulireki at Linnanmaki and Reaper at Amsterdam Dungeon along the same lines, except my Mack?


    They're both Mack "e-Motion" coasters. Please correct me if i'm wrong but it's my understanding that these coasters feature a slight "drift" along the corners.



  5. Well fellow gays, it was cool while it lasted. We're once again deemed a minority until at least December..


    SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court has extended a stay on same-sex marriages in California until it decides whether a ban on such unions is constitutional.


    It is just the latest turn in a protracted legal battle over Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban.


    The ruling, issued by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, came less than a week after a federal district judge, Vaughn R. Walker, lifted a stay he had imposed to allow proponents of the ban to argue why same-sex marriages should not proceed. On Aug. 4, Judge Walker ruled that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional.


    Even when lifting his stay on Thursday, Judge Walker allowed six days for the Ninth Circuit to review his ruling. That left many gay and lesbian couples and their supporters hopeful that same-sex marriages would resume Wednesday at 5 p.m., when Judge Walker’s stay would have expired.


    That will not happen. Now, such weddings will not resume until, at least, the appeals court decides the case. And perhaps not until it is decided by the United States Supreme Court, where it seems to be headed.


    The Ninth Circuit panel, made up of Judges Edward Leavy, Michael Daly Hawkins and Sidney R. Thomas, determined that a stay pending the appeal was appropriate.


    The panel requested the first briefs to be filed in September and for the appeal to be heard in court in December.


    Richard L. Hasen, a professor of law at the Loyola Law School Los Angeles, said the ruling “takes the heat off the Supreme Court,” which was likely to have been asked for an emergency stay by those who support Proposition 8 if the Ninth Circuit had not acted.


    But Mr. Hasen added that the stay’s putting a halt to any potential marriages did not mean that the Ninth Circuit would necessarily rule in favor of Proposition 8.


    “I don’t think that the granting of the stay means much, if anything, about how the Ninth Circuit will rule on the merits,” he said. “It won’t be the same panel deciding the merits as decided the stay motion.”


    Mr. Hasen added he believed that even supporters of same-sex marriage could see the logic of extending a stay.


    One issues most likely to be settled by the appeals court is that of legal standing. Both Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown of California — named as defendants in the case — have voiced opposition to Proposition 8.


    That left the defense of the measure primarily to its ballot sponsors, including the group Protectmarriage.com. Some legal experts have questioned, however, whether a group that is not charged with enforcing a law can be found to be responsible for defending it.


    - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/17/us/17prop.html?src=mv


    In a major victory for gay rights activists, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday that a voter initiative banning same-sex marriage in California violated the Constitution's equal protection and due process rights clauses.


    After a five-month wait, 9th Circuit District Court Judge Vaughn Walker offered a 136-page decision in the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, firmly rejecting Proposition 8, which was passed by voters in November 2008.


    "Although Proposition 8 fails to possess even a rational basis, the evidence presented at trial shows that gays and lesbians are the type of minority strict scrutiny was designed to protect," Walker ruled.


    "Plaintiffs do not seek recognition of a new right. To characterize plaintiffs' objective as "the right to same-sex marriage" would suggest that plaintiffs seek something different from what opposite-sex couples across the state enjoy -- namely, marriage. Rather, plaintiffs ask California to recognize their relationships for what they are: marriages."


    "Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians, including: gays and lesbians do not have intimate relationships similar to heterosexual couples; gays and lesbians are not as good as heterosexuals; and gay and lesbian relationships do not deserve the full recognition of society."


    The judgment was the first offered by a federal court with respect to laws banning gay marriage at the state level and it promises to have massive reverberations across the political and judicial landscape. The decision is now expected to head to the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court (also based in San Francisco) for appeal and from there to the Supreme Court.


    In the interim, however, Walker's ruling gave gay-rights activists a second occasion to rejoice in less than a month. In July, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as one man and one woman, was also unconstitutional.


    "It is not only a home run it is a grand slam," said Jon Davidson the legal director at Lambda Legal, the country's largest and oldest LBGT legal organization. "This decisions is not going to be the end of this fight, the proponents have already said they will appeal. But I think the factual findings that the judge has made and his clear and detailed analysis will be important to frame the case as it goes up on appeal."


    "This is part of an educational process that is going on in this country. When judges look outside of the political process and they go through the evidence and treat arguments as more than just sound bites they come to the conclusion that withholding marriage from same sex couples hurts them and their families and doesn't help anyone. That helps move the conversation."


    Wednesday's decision came after lengthy, substantive, and at times provocative legal deliberations in which an odd-couple pairing of lawyers took on the cause of overturning the same-sex marriage ban. Theodore Olson and David Boies -- direct adversaries in the 2000 Supreme Court presidential recount battle -- made the case that Prop 8 violated both the equal protection and due process clauses of the constitution. The law, the two argued, was discriminatory on the basis of both sexual orientation and on the basis of sex in addition to violating the principle that marriage was a personal liberty.


    "The Supreme Court has said that marriage is the most important relation in life. Now that's being withheld from the plaintiffs," Olson said in his closing argument. "Marriage, the Supreme Court has said again and again, is a component of liberty, privacy, spirituality and autonomy."


    Representing the defense, another Washington-based lawyer, Charles Cooper leaned heavily on the social impact of codifying gay marriage, arguing that "marriage is to channel the sexual behavior between men and women into a procreative union."


    In deciding the case, Walker offered a variety of findings that may be as important as the ruling itself. Among them were the following:


    "Sexual orientation is commonly discussed as a characteristic of the individual. Sexual orientation is fundamental to a person's identity and is a distinguishing characteristic that defines gays and lesbians as a discrete group. Proponents' assertion that sexual orientation cannot be defined is contrary to the weight of the evidence."

    "Individuals do not generally choose their sexual orientation. No credible evidence supports a finding that an individual may, through conscious decision, therapeutic intervention or any other method, change his or her sexual orientation."

    "Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in the characteristics relevant to the ability to form successful marital unions. Like opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples have happy, satisfying relationships and form deep emotional bonds and strong commitments to their partners. Standardized measures of relationship satisfaction, relationship adjustment and love do not differ depending on whether a couple is same-sex or opposite-sex."

    "Marrying a person of the opposite sex is an unrealistic option for gay and lesbian individuals."

    "Same-sex couples receive the same tangible and intangible benefits from marriage that opposite-sex couples receive."

    "The availability of domestic partnership does not provide gays and lesbians with a status equivalent to marriage because the cultural meaning of marriage and its associated benefits are intentionally withheld from same-sex couples in domestic partnerships."

    "Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, have children outside of marriage or otherwise affect the stability of opposite-sex marriages."

    Perhaps the most important political finding that Walker made was his conclusion that the fact that Prop 8 passed as a voter initiative was irrelevant as "fundamental rights may not be submitted to [a] vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."


    It does not appear that Walker allowed for an immediate hold on his decision, which means that the defense must seek one from a higher court. Until then, gay couples could be legally allowed to marry in the state of California.

  7. Here is a relatively new pic of my 2010 Mazda3... the color is very weird- but it has grown on me. It's copper red, during the day it LOOKS red but at night and during certain other times it looks maroon... I think that's awesome, personally!




    Nice car!!

  8. here's my only gripe about the car..


    the sticker said 29mpg on the highway and i just did a 300 mile trip yesterday and the screen said my average economy for the trip was 27


    really though, it's not a huge deal to me because i absolutely love the car, it drives and handles amazingly well. i drove a 2010 jetta, a 2010 honda civic, and a 2010 lancer and it's far better IMO.

  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/