Yeah. In my popular persona, writing like a cretin is actually to my advantage. Here in the lower 48, we suspect intelligence.

quote:

Originally posted by Mean Old Man:

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor:

impacted

Fucksakes.

It's a fine word, in relation to bowels and wisdom teeth.

Thank Christ I´m not alone in loathing ¨impacted¨ when it´s used as a synonym for ¨affected¨.

It´s almost as bad as ¨event¨ used in a meteorological sense. It´s not rain, it´s a ¨rain event¨. Or a ¨flood event¨ rather than a flood.

Why use one word when two will do? Fucken illiterates....

quote:

Originally posted by Kradlum:

quote:

Originally posted by Mean Old Man:

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor:

impacted

Fucksakes.

It's a fine word, in relation to bowels and wisdom teeth.

In that context you're comparing an adjective with a verb. Considering the origin of the word impact, i would consider Trog's usage as a verb at least as acceptable as the more standard use of impact as a noun, or of impacted as an adjective.

That kind of talk'll get your face impacted round here.

Not that i've got alot of other uses for my face, but ok i'll shut the fuck up.

Who am i kidding, i won't shut up. Was hoping someone might argue with my post and offer some enlightenment as to why 'impacted' shouldn't be used in that particular context. I'm fascinated by language but also challenged by my own ignorance, and this issue caught me off guard. So if anyone would care to humor me, is this a legitimate misuse of the word, or just an issue of personal preference?

I checked the dictionary and saw I was wrong, so didn't want to argue :P

Impact

"The use of impact as a verb meaning "to have an effect" often has a big impact on readers. In our 2001 survey, 85 percent of the Usage Panel disapproved of the construction to impact on, as in the sentence These policies are impacting on our ability to achieve success; fully 80 percent disapproved of the use of impact as a transitive verb in the sentence The court ruling will impact the education of minority students. · It is unclear why this usage provokes such a strong response, but it cannot be because of novelty. Impact has been used as a verb since 1601, when it meant "to fix or pack in," and its modern, figurative use dates from 1935. It may be that its frequent appearance in the jargon-riddled remarks of politicians, military officials, and financial analysts continues to make people suspicious. Nevertheless, the verbal use of impact has become so common in the working language of corporations and institutions that many speakers have begun to regard it as standard. It seems likely, then, that the verb will eventually become as unobjectionable as contact is now, since it will no longer betray any particular pretentiousness on the part of those who use it. See Usage Note at contact."

When someone like Mean Old Man tells me I used a word incorrectly, that's all the proof I need. It's not like I'm ashamed of it, whether I should be or not. I'm not.

George W. Bush was President of the Fucking United States of America.

I write a little better than he does.

Satisfies my curiosity, thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor:

I write a little better than he does.

I'd say that's an understatement, but that's an understatement.

You guys. Such murmuring shit.

Don't go misunderestimating yourself, Trog.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Okay, Trog, hit it!
Oil Spill Reported Near Deepwater Drilling Site in Gulf

Been on it for hours and hours. Looks to be a different well and field about 25 miles from the previous blowout, and not nearly as serious.

A couple of days ago, I noticed that the Development Driller III (one of the rigs used to drill the relief wells) was back on the Macondo site -- so this news of a big slick North of there was scary as hell.

Looking like the two are unrelated.

I looked at the only presently available pictures of this latest "slick". Problem: it doesn't look slick.

In those pictures, I have to say it doesn't look like oil. With oil, you see a different surface texture, because it's on top of the water and has a different surface tension, so reacts differently to wind and waves. This stuff actually looks like its just under the water and appears to be mixing with water on its edges.

In drilling, they use stuff called "inverted mud" -- that is, an oil-based, instead of water based mud. They use it where certain formation clays might swell or otherwise react unfavorably with water or water-based muds.

I don't know how accurate those pictures are, (only place I've seen them is on Huffpo and I'm always making fun of Huffpo pics). So until we know more, I cannot commit.

In the two pics I've seen, that doesn't look like crude oil.

Could be some other drilling or production chemical like inhibitor, or friction reducer or any number of things, including mud, too.

Could be biological as well. Bacteria, plankton or algae bloom. It could be pollution or spill-related and yet be biological.