How Is Everyone Doing After The Storm?
- Thread starter whirlcool
- Start date
Help Support :
Thank you Roger!
davetranter
Well-known member
4-wheel drive - 4-wheel stop
As was pointed out to me when I was learning to drive, the simple truth in all of this is-
The Brakes Stop The Wheels..... The TYRES Stop The Vehicle (U.K. spelling again ;-) )
The average car has four patches of rubber compound about the size of a man's shoeprint actually in contact with the road/pavement, and this is what idiots expect to arrest 2 tons of vehicle from 80 mph on ice..... Right....
All best
Dave T
P.S. It's mainly just 'wet and windy' this side of the 'pond' at the moment ;-)
As was pointed out to me when I was learning to drive, the simple truth in all of this is-
The Brakes Stop The Wheels..... The TYRES Stop The Vehicle (U.K. spelling again ;-) )
The average car has four patches of rubber compound about the size of a man's shoeprint actually in contact with the road/pavement, and this is what idiots expect to arrest 2 tons of vehicle from 80 mph on ice..... Right....
All best
Dave T
P.S. It's mainly just 'wet and windy' this side of the 'pond' at the moment ;-)
The funny thing about facts ...
"As a great Senator from NY once said, we may be entitled to our own opinion, but not to our own facts."
The funny thing about facts is that "experts" (qualified and accomplished as they may be) are quite adept at stacking, twisting, and even omitting the "facts" to suit their own agendas.
You're talking to someone who deals with FACTS for a living.
For every set of "facts" supporting global warming, I can show you "facts" that debunk it.
So why do MOST "experts" "agree" on one set of facts? Because most people -- even experts -- have to pay the mortgage, just like everyone else, and to buck the tide would be professional suicide, just as in most other professional fields.
Here is another helpful link that the scientific establishment doesn't want you to see:
"As a great Senator from NY once said, we may be entitled to our own opinion, but not to our own facts."
The funny thing about facts is that "experts" (qualified and accomplished as they may be) are quite adept at stacking, twisting, and even omitting the "facts" to suit their own agendas.
You're talking to someone who deals with FACTS for a living.
For every set of "facts" supporting global warming, I can show you "facts" that debunk it.
So why do MOST "experts" "agree" on one set of facts? Because most people -- even experts -- have to pay the mortgage, just like everyone else, and to buck the tide would be professional suicide, just as in most other professional fields.
Here is another helpful link that the scientific establishment doesn't want you to see:
Loading…
reason.com
mrb627
Well-known member
After the Storm?
Really? Is it over yet? Where is our GLOBAL WARMING?
Malcolm
Really? Is it over yet? Where is our GLOBAL WARMING?
Malcolm
And even if we all agree on global warming/climate change, then what? Are we going to stop using fossil fuels? Will we bring manufacturing back to the developed world where environmental and quality standards can be enforced like they used to be? Are we going to hold the Russians, Chinese, Indians et. al. to account over their lax standards? Will our businesses and governements stop doing business with climate polluters?
And what's up with all that agression, patronizing and bullying from the global warming camp? It's not as if the conversation was ever a friendly one based on intelligent discussion. From the start it was always 'you are either with us or you are a conservative crank.'
Most 'scientists' who publically support AGW are not even climate scientists, but ideologues who have a particular world view. They, too, have already mentally signed off on who will be allowed to live in their ideal world and who will have to be sacrificed to make it happen.
As for climate change mitigation - we all know that it is coming. Carbon taxes and trading schemes, they are too good to pass up. Billions will be generated for governments and other vested interests without having to do much more than shuffle paper. Wealth will be redistributed and ordinary middle-class people will foot the bill and pay for all of it. Haven't you heard that most of you have it too good already? It is time that you do with less; much less.
In another 20 years I might take AGW serious. I've got plenty of time and don't see why I need to jump on that bandwagon and bleet on about it as if it is some kind of absolute truth. I'd like to wait and see how it all pans out before I make an ideological commitment. Anyway, they keep coming up with new tihs before I have a chance to make up my mind on the last tihs. I find it hard to keep up actually.
And what's up with all that agression, patronizing and bullying from the global warming camp? It's not as if the conversation was ever a friendly one based on intelligent discussion. From the start it was always 'you are either with us or you are a conservative crank.'
Most 'scientists' who publically support AGW are not even climate scientists, but ideologues who have a particular world view. They, too, have already mentally signed off on who will be allowed to live in their ideal world and who will have to be sacrificed to make it happen.
As for climate change mitigation - we all know that it is coming. Carbon taxes and trading schemes, they are too good to pass up. Billions will be generated for governments and other vested interests without having to do much more than shuffle paper. Wealth will be redistributed and ordinary middle-class people will foot the bill and pay for all of it. Haven't you heard that most of you have it too good already? It is time that you do with less; much less.
In another 20 years I might take AGW serious. I've got plenty of time and don't see why I need to jump on that bandwagon and bleet on about it as if it is some kind of absolute truth. I'd like to wait and see how it all pans out before I make an ideological commitment. Anyway, they keep coming up with new tihs before I have a chance to make up my mind on the last tihs. I find it hard to keep up actually.
Agreed, Olav ...
But here are some "truths" that the global warming activists conveniently ignore:
-- Most people don't CHOOSE to drive giant gas-guzzling SUVs. In this country, it's now pretty much impossible to have a family car that's really a CAR if your family includes more than two children, thanks to strict laws requiring children to be strapped into bulky booster seats until puberty (quite often, until the kid is just a few years away from legal driving age!). And oh yes, until age 12 it's illegal for ANY child to ride in the front seat. So having three kids makes a "car" impossible; you now need a vehicle with THREE rows of seats to accommodate all those government-mandated safety seats.
-- More than half of the oil consumed in this country is not for fuel at all, but for industrial uses, including drugs, cosmetics, and mostly plastics.
So for all their screaming about using fossil fuels, I'd like to see some REAL proposals from the activists about what kind of world we should all be living in.
But here are some "truths" that the global warming activists conveniently ignore:
-- Most people don't CHOOSE to drive giant gas-guzzling SUVs. In this country, it's now pretty much impossible to have a family car that's really a CAR if your family includes more than two children, thanks to strict laws requiring children to be strapped into bulky booster seats until puberty (quite often, until the kid is just a few years away from legal driving age!). And oh yes, until age 12 it's illegal for ANY child to ride in the front seat. So having three kids makes a "car" impossible; you now need a vehicle with THREE rows of seats to accommodate all those government-mandated safety seats.
-- More than half of the oil consumed in this country is not for fuel at all, but for industrial uses, including drugs, cosmetics, and mostly plastics.
So for all their screaming about using fossil fuels, I'd like to see some REAL proposals from the activists about what kind of world we should all be living in.
Funny that you should mention kids...
...and car seats. It's exactly the same situation here in Australia. You live in NY, right?
Since they've done away with full-sized family cars and station wagons, families have no choice, but to buy SUVs or family vans. Only family vans have weak engines, aren't built as sturdy and you can't take them off-roading, nor pull a trailer. My sister wanted an eight seater because she has to drive her three kids and their little friends around. Plus, if she wants to take our parents somewhere they can all go in one car as opposed to two. They go camping with a trailer and require something a bit more substantial than a four cylinder engine. So she bought a Toyota Prado 6 cylinder, which ticked all the boxes for her. BTW, her SUV is more economical than my 2003 Toyota Camry, which is also a 6.
Imagine if the US didn't have access to fossil fuel during the current polar vortex (lol, I'd prefer to call it a cold snap still). You reckon that windmills and solar panels would be enough to keep you all warm?
I shudder to think what kind of a world we would live in if militant environmentalists got to call the shots. I reckon there'd be green shirts everywhere and anyone not goose stepping fast enough would end up on a compost heap.
...and car seats. It's exactly the same situation here in Australia. You live in NY, right?
Since they've done away with full-sized family cars and station wagons, families have no choice, but to buy SUVs or family vans. Only family vans have weak engines, aren't built as sturdy and you can't take them off-roading, nor pull a trailer. My sister wanted an eight seater because she has to drive her three kids and their little friends around. Plus, if she wants to take our parents somewhere they can all go in one car as opposed to two. They go camping with a trailer and require something a bit more substantial than a four cylinder engine. So she bought a Toyota Prado 6 cylinder, which ticked all the boxes for her. BTW, her SUV is more economical than my 2003 Toyota Camry, which is also a 6.
Imagine if the US didn't have access to fossil fuel during the current polar vortex (lol, I'd prefer to call it a cold snap still). You reckon that windmills and solar panels would be enough to keep you all warm?
I shudder to think what kind of a world we would live in if militant environmentalists got to call the shots. I reckon there'd be green shirts everywhere and anyone not goose stepping fast enough would end up on a compost heap.
I've been on this site since the beginning and have seen a lot. But you Matt simply beat everything I've seen so far. In a short while you have tried convincing us to use expensive Himalayan salt, tried to let us believe that some 1500 Watt heaters put out more heat than other 1500 Watt heaters and now you're trying to let us believe there is something like global cooling going on.
What's next? Should we believe in witchcraft?
Signed,
Flabbergasted
What's next? Should we believe in witchcraft?
Signed,
Flabbergasted
firedome
Well-known member
Knew it was a complete waste of time...
as some clearly don't have a clue about how science works, or even the difference between climate and weather evidently. There inherently IS NO agenda in academic peer-reviewed science. It's those with a political agenda that twist facts to suit.
NO specific response on the 2nd link provided? The link that completely exposes as a falacious farce "Mr. Exceptionalism's" tree-ring piece? The piece that twists data that ii perfectly valid on it's own, but is then falsely interpreted by yet another fool climate change denier for political ends? READ the link and THEN respond! Too much work? Doesn't fit a slanted worldview? So much easier to just stick to emotion and myth. Aggression? Who posted the provocative link in a perfectly civil thread... with no expectation of response? I for one don't suffer fools gladly. Biologists can see probably more than anyone else just how far down the tubes the planet has gone, so it's aggression well deserved, I'd say.
as some clearly don't have a clue about how science works, or even the difference between climate and weather evidently. There inherently IS NO agenda in academic peer-reviewed science. It's those with a political agenda that twist facts to suit.
NO specific response on the 2nd link provided? The link that completely exposes as a falacious farce "Mr. Exceptionalism's" tree-ring piece? The piece that twists data that ii perfectly valid on it's own, but is then falsely interpreted by yet another fool climate change denier for political ends? READ the link and THEN respond! Too much work? Doesn't fit a slanted worldview? So much easier to just stick to emotion and myth. Aggression? Who posted the provocative link in a perfectly civil thread... with no expectation of response? I for one don't suffer fools gladly. Biologists can see probably more than anyone else just how far down the tubes the planet has gone, so it's aggression well deserved, I'd say.
Louis +1
The one thing I have seen in common with the climate change deniers I have met is that they tend to have a minimal grasp of basic scientific fact, or at least they don't mind cherry picking the facts that support their agenda while ignoring others.
In the case of climate change I DEARLY hope that the deniers are right and that in 50 years they all tell me "I told you so". The shame is that climate scientists are in nearly 100% agreement that the climate is warming and they have about 96+% certainty that man has had an effect. As each day passes the deniers have less and less of a leg to stand on.
I find it humorous as how the deniers like to use isolated weather events to "prove" their view, i.e. its cold so warming isn't happening. Funny on the really hot days why don't they say something then??
My apologies for perpetuating the off topic ways of this thread.
The one thing I have seen in common with the climate change deniers I have met is that they tend to have a minimal grasp of basic scientific fact, or at least they don't mind cherry picking the facts that support their agenda while ignoring others.
In the case of climate change I DEARLY hope that the deniers are right and that in 50 years they all tell me "I told you so". The shame is that climate scientists are in nearly 100% agreement that the climate is warming and they have about 96+% certainty that man has had an effect. As each day passes the deniers have less and less of a leg to stand on.
I find it humorous as how the deniers like to use isolated weather events to "prove" their view, i.e. its cold so warming isn't happening. Funny on the really hot days why don't they say something then??
My apologies for perpetuating the off topic ways of this thread.
As I said: My car wouldn't start yesterday morning, but I wanted to see if I could get her to try last night before I went to work...
(And in my Doomsday fashion, took out my Phone Charger, Sunglasses, the $24.75 worth of Quarters in the change compartment, and my daughter's booster seat & moved everything to my wife's car, cept the coins went in a bag to be wrapped in some coin wrappers I set aside... But I left my pack of Marlboro Red 100's in the glove box!)
Wel, sure enough the engine turned over & I at least put my shades back in the car & Vikki was able to get me to work--and she started even more easily when I got off early this morning to get me home!
So, Miracles DO EXIST!!!!
And our meat, dairy, eggs and produce as well as dry food goods are sure accordingly getting wiped out! Sure hope I can at least buy another can of shortening & a jug of vegetable oil for when I get the series of days off when my store is SLOW (and it WAS last night) for some endless cake baking!
Gotta make a "4" "FOUR" my daughter and a "44" "FOUR" me--the number candles, that is, on the two cakes I'm hopefully gonna try to cobble together by Sunday when we have a party for her! Her 4th was yesterday & I'm gonna be 44 on the 26th...
-- Dave
(And in my Doomsday fashion, took out my Phone Charger, Sunglasses, the $24.75 worth of Quarters in the change compartment, and my daughter's booster seat & moved everything to my wife's car, cept the coins went in a bag to be wrapped in some coin wrappers I set aside... But I left my pack of Marlboro Red 100's in the glove box!)
Wel, sure enough the engine turned over & I at least put my shades back in the car & Vikki was able to get me to work--and she started even more easily when I got off early this morning to get me home!
So, Miracles DO EXIST!!!!
And our meat, dairy, eggs and produce as well as dry food goods are sure accordingly getting wiped out! Sure hope I can at least buy another can of shortening & a jug of vegetable oil for when I get the series of days off when my store is SLOW (and it WAS last night) for some endless cake baking!
Gotta make a "4" "FOUR" my daughter and a "44" "FOUR" me--the number candles, that is, on the two cakes I'm hopefully gonna try to cobble together by Sunday when we have a party for her! Her 4th was yesterday & I'm gonna be 44 on the 26th...
-- Dave
Matt
You removed all doubt.
You removed all doubt.
Well then!
Since no one can agree, I took the liberty of copy/paste all this and sent Algore a communique. We'll just have to cool our jets and wait until he responds.
One caveat though, whatever Algore says goes. No one, myself included, is allowed to question, debate, discuss, argue or have a single thought that is not in line with what Algore says.
I will post his reply here if and when I get one.
Since no one can agree, I took the liberty of copy/paste all this and sent Algore a communique. We'll just have to cool our jets and wait until he responds.
One caveat though, whatever Algore says goes. No one, myself included, is allowed to question, debate, discuss, argue or have a single thought that is not in line with what Algore says.
I will post his reply here if and when I get one.
Loading…
https
know, a little off topic.......
just so were stating true FACTS.......
a child must be 8 years old or 80 pounds....which ever comes first, to be able to sit in the front seat, and not use a booster or child seat!....yet, I don't understand why they make me turn the airbag off if the child is in the front seat!
I have had upwards of ten foster children, and have to abide to rules, regulations, and standards, 100 times more, better, sturdy, or stricter than any standard family environment in order to care for any such child, wether in my home or vehicle!....
then again, thats why I have a 15 passenger window van.....with built in child seats, lap and shoulder belts for all passengers and side airbags.....added in are a fire extinguisher and first aid kit.....and tell me this is not beyond the exception to the rule!.....a requirement for any vehicle any child is in under state care......YET, the parents of these children are not required to have any of this....
just so were stating true FACTS.......
a child must be 8 years old or 80 pounds....which ever comes first, to be able to sit in the front seat, and not use a booster or child seat!....yet, I don't understand why they make me turn the airbag off if the child is in the front seat!
I have had upwards of ten foster children, and have to abide to rules, regulations, and standards, 100 times more, better, sturdy, or stricter than any standard family environment in order to care for any such child, wether in my home or vehicle!....
then again, thats why I have a 15 passenger window van.....with built in child seats, lap and shoulder belts for all passengers and side airbags.....added in are a fire extinguisher and first aid kit.....and tell me this is not beyond the exception to the rule!.....a requirement for any vehicle any child is in under state care......YET, the parents of these children are not required to have any of this....
We had a burst pipe. When I went down today I found my truck (and about a dozen other vehicles) frozen in a river of ice. Maintenance apparently forgot to clear the catch basin of snow, so when the pipe burst, it flooded that whole section of the parking lot. I got out OK though. Current temp: 19F.
firedome
Well-known member
"there IS an agenda...nobody works for free"
Oh, never hear of "tenure", or the concept of "academic freedom" or "peer-review"?
Then how about "integrity", or "objectivity", qualities not exactly exemplified by Mr. Exceptional, who clearly is no scientist.
The whole BASIS of Scientific Inquiry is objective, unbiased verification OR rejection of a postulated theory by using data produced and observed via an experimental method that can be duplicated by other scientists. To ascribe any kind of "agenda" to this process is to deny the entire reason for, and basis of, the Scientific Method itself, something that clearly is not understood by some here.
Still waiting for intelligent objective discussion of the 2nd link's debunking of the 1st.
Silence... Not gonna happen, because there isn't any to be had.
The failure of American science education is once again on display, a happenstance that occurs with disconcerting regularity.
Depressing, but cheer up folks, it'll be 40s by the weekend.
No more to say, Over and Out.
Oh, never hear of "tenure", or the concept of "academic freedom" or "peer-review"?
Then how about "integrity", or "objectivity", qualities not exactly exemplified by Mr. Exceptional, who clearly is no scientist.
The whole BASIS of Scientific Inquiry is objective, unbiased verification OR rejection of a postulated theory by using data produced and observed via an experimental method that can be duplicated by other scientists. To ascribe any kind of "agenda" to this process is to deny the entire reason for, and basis of, the Scientific Method itself, something that clearly is not understood by some here.
Still waiting for intelligent objective discussion of the 2nd link's debunking of the 1st.
Silence... Not gonna happen, because there isn't any to be had.
The failure of American science education is once again on display, a happenstance that occurs with disconcerting regularity.
Depressing, but cheer up folks, it'll be 40s by the weekend.
No more to say, Over and Out.
"Academic freedom" ...
... SERIOUSLY?
Have you ever been inside a university?
Academic "freedom" exists only when you subscribe to the dominant paradigm.
Oh, and tenure can -- and often IS -- revoked.
Visit a college campus and talk to some "tenured" professors. It could be one of the most enlightening things you'll ever do.
... SERIOUSLY?
Have you ever been inside a university?
Academic "freedom" exists only when you subscribe to the dominant paradigm.
Oh, and tenure can -- and often IS -- revoked.
Visit a college campus and talk to some "tenured" professors. It could be one of the most enlightening things you'll ever do.
