pg (01/11/83)
I have a friend from North Dakota who reports that it is very windy there; she said that one time the wind stopped and all the chickens fell over. Peter Garst HP labs
clif (01/12/83)
I have been to 47 states the three I've haven't visited are Alaska, Hawaii, and You guessed it North Dakota. Nor, have I meet anyone who has ever been there. One vote for North Dakota doesn't exist.
abh (01/15/83)
Yes, North Dakota does exist; I've been there. My family went on a trip to Winnipeg, Manitoba. The easiest way to get to Winnipeg from Minneapolis is to take I-94 to Fargo, and then take I-29 through North Dakota to Canada. I-29 turns into Highway 75 in Canada. A couple of points of interest: I-29 is only two lanes (one in each direction). The KTHI-TV Tower (the world's tallest structure at 2,063 feet) is visible from I-29.
dap (01/18/83)
I thought it time to come to the defense of North Dakota... I've been in N.D. many times - it does exist and is a beautiful state in many ways. I've never seen sunrises and sunsets as beautiful as those in N.D. The east and north is good farming country, responsible for much of the wheat and most of the sunflower seeds and oil produced in this country. The west is rolling range country, with the Theodore Roosevelt National Monument (also known as the badlands, but not to be confused with the badlands in South Dakota) in the far west near Montana. It can be traversed via many excellently maintained highways (how many states can claim good roads!) including U.S. Highway 2 across the northern part of the state. It is served by Amtrak (something South Dakota is not!), and the Burlington Northern, Soo Line and Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific railroads, plus numerous airlines such as Northwest Orient. But most of all, North Dakota has the most important advantage of all over all the other states - nobody who has been complaining about or questioning the existence of the state will ever visit - all the better for North Dakota. Dave Poplawski
coltoff (01/23/83)
I refuse to prove the existence of North Dakota for proof denies faith, and without faith North Dakota is nothing. On the other hand without a (North) Dakota there would be no (South) Dakota. Therefore North Dakota must exist. With this ib mind North Dakota vanishes in a puff of logic. I will now go on to prove that C = PASCAL and then get myself intoxicated on an alcoholic beverage. Joel Coltoff burdvax!coltoff
arlan (01/26/83)
I once was traveling in South Dakota and wondered about driving the 40 miles to North Dakota. I was told by a wandering bearded man that North Dakota was merely a legendary land, used to justify the name given to the state I was traveling in. Seems an ex-Confederate moved to the Dakota Territory after The War, and determined to bring The South with him. Guess he did! --arlan andrews/american bell/indy
CSvax:Pucc-H:ad0 (01/27/83)
Of course N.D does not exist - but it used to. Dont you remember how it
was obliterated in an h-bomb test, and how the goverment witheld the
information from the common people because they didnt want to start a panic,
and .... opps! Guess I let the cat out of the bag. Anyhow, North Dakota is
now merely a congressional slush (party) fund. Where else do you think all
the federal aid to N.D. goes, if it doesent even exist. They even have a
few people on the payroll to go around claiming to be from N.D. ( they
thought of everything )
Not afraid to let the truth be known,
A. J. Thomasmcewan (01/27/83)
#R:burdvax:-50600:uiucdcs:10600038:000:224 uiucdcs!mcewan Jan 26 23:04:00 1983 Now you've gone too far, you atheistic scum! You will surely burn in Hell for all eternity for your blasphamy! How can we continue to allow access to the net to people who would subject us to such sacrilege as "C = PASCAL"?
franka (01/28/83)
#R:burdvax:-50600:tekcad:7600009:000:225 tekcad!franka Jan 28 10:16:00 1983 Aliens have landed in Akron! They are going to remove all vestiges of North Dakota from the face of the earth! Yow! They like to eat donuts and taco sauce with a convention of shoe salesmen. Am I having fun yet? Zippy
kos (01/28/83)
#R:burdvax:-50600:uiucdcs:10600041:000:511
uiucdcs!kos Jan 28 13:35:00 1983
Actually, saying "C = PASCAL" may not be incorrect. It depends on
which of the languages you're doing it in. If it's in Pascal, then
obviously "C = PASCAL" (as a conditional expression) is incorrect.
However, if you're saying it in C, "C = PASCAL" is a legitimate
(although questionable) assignment statement.
Apples and oranges, anyway. (Which DON'T come from North Dakota.)
#include <stdio.h>
main()
{
printf("Phil Kos\n");
printf("University of Illinois\n");
exit(0);
}fair (01/30/83)
Akron is in Ohio! It can't be in North Dakota. (doughnuts & taco sauce??!) Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@Berkeley
mmt (01/31/83)
========================================== Now you've gone too far, you atheistic scum! You will surely burn in Hell for all eternity for your blasphamy! How can we continue to allow access to the net to people who would subject us to such sacrilege as "C = PASCAL"? ========================================== But it is the revealed truth: P = P-code (subject to interpretation, therefore null and void) A signifies there is only one S has merely statistical significance C (C later) A reiterating the fact that there is only one, so you'd better believe it L = Language Hence, apart from matters of interpretation, within statistical error PASCAL = C Language Martin Taylor