Climate Change Poll

[Jantar]

I just want to find out how many Climate change Deniers there are on this site.

[The End]

Error 404 poll not found.

[Jantar]

Error 404 poll not found.
Try again. It takes time to post the poll after the initial message.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Same as leaking houses. Always have and always will.

6/6 is amazing and certainly doesn't reflect the small percentage of people saying such, nor the seemingly large percentage of those who attack those who do. I guess this is a good indicator of the apathy prevalent in today's society.

[mashman]

Wotno: The climate has always changed, we might have made it worse.

[Woodman]

Wotno: The climate has always changed, we might have made it worse.

Exactly, so best err on the side of caution.

[puddytat]

Am I thick as it seems to me that the poll doesn't have the obvious question....

has the climate changed in the past & is the present change due to humans

[Jantar]

Am I thick as it seems to me that the poll doesn't have the obvious question....

has the climate changed in the past & is the present change due to humans
That is option 2. If the present change is all due to humans then natural climate change must have stopped.

[mashman]

Exactly, so best err on the side of caution.

It'd be nice lol.

[Ender EnZed]

Your poll is poorly worded. Option four covers the positions of those who believe CO2 is not contributing to climate change and also those who believe CO2 is a major contributor to climate change.

[Jantar]

Your poll is poorly worded. Option four covers the positions of those who believe CO2 is not contributing to climate change and also those who believe CO2 is a major contributor to climate change.
The poll is not about whether or not CO2 contributes to climate change: Of course it does and that can be shown scientifically to be at the rate of 1.2K per doubling of CO2 concentration. The poll is about whether or not anyone denies that the climate changes, for any reason. I.e. Climate Deniers.

[Ender EnZed]

The poll is not about whether or not CO2 contributes to climate change: Of course it does and that can be shown scientifically to be at the rate of 1.2K per doubling of CO2 concentration. The poll is about whether or not anyone denies that the climate changes, for any reason. I.e. Climate Deniers.

Alright then.

I wasn't aware such people existed.

[Jantar]

Alright then.

I wasn't aware such people existed.
If you read the other climate thread you will see that there are quite a few on here who believe there a lot of climate change deniers around.

[Motu]

I believe we are fucking this planet big time, but I'm not going to bother trying to decifer the obscure wording of the poll.

[JimO]

I believe we are fucking this planet big time, but I'm not going to bother trying to decifer the obscure wording of the poll.
when you say we is it us here in kiwi land or those other cunts .....city in China...we went past on a cruise up to the 3 Gorges dam......http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x67/jim157/11069356_970666076279217_9052074231164240179_n-1_zpsowzjdz1m.jpg (http://s187.photobucket.com/user/jim157/media/11069356_970666076279217_9052074231164240179_n-1_zpsowzjdz1m.jpg.html)

[eldog]

when you say we is it us here in kiwi land or those other cunts .....city in China...we went past on a cruise up to the 3 Gorges dam......

I had a similar view (not as bad) in Guaungzhou - Pearl River a few years back.
The River is another story. Parts of this region are only now catching up on the rapid growth.
Kiwis really have no idea about how people live in HK/China

I saw extremes of how people live only metres away from each other. Life can be brutal. Saw the aftermath of slow speed mbike crash there, not nice.

On the 1KC recently I was reminded about how poor rural areas are compared to most of AKL and wondered how those people coped/lived/what there lives were like etc and if they wanted to escape how they could afford it(I had plenty of time to think about it AWA). The people were friendly no matter were I went.

The climate has always changed, its just that now humans have accelerated that change through various means.
How we respond will determine the RATE of change.

[Ocean1]

when you say we is it us here in kiwi land or those other cunts .....city in China...we went past on a cruise up to the 3 Gorges dam......

And you would have seen the endless strings of barges delivering China's only national energy source from upstream to the power stations where 3rd rate brown coal is converted directly into that smog. And that won't change until a clean energy source is available to them at no higher cost, and until then: fuck the anti-China environmentalists.

[Jantar]

The climate has always changed, its just that now humans have accelerated that change through various means.
How we respond will determine the RATE of change.
According to the Hadcrut4 database (the one the IPCC uses), the rate of change for the 30 years from 1913 to 1942 is almost identical to the period from 1986 to 2015. So where is that accelerated rate of change?

[Voltaire]

I'll vote in the poll just after I vote in the flag referendum....

I wonder if on the Climate Change Forum they have a poll on which motorcycle to buy.

[yokel]

At the end of the if they can't even predict the climate then how the fuck are they going to change it and to what?

If humans were never invented then what would the climate be doing today? whats the base level?


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7zO9zEfqWDA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[TheDemonLord]

One really has to choose option 4 - there is no other option to choose, so in many cases its a poorly worded poll.

[scumdog]

Wotno: The climate has always changed, we might have made it worse.

Yes, I too was looking for that option. (Maybe not in Mashys words exactly...)

[Moise]

Not sure if you worded the choices quite right.

Fairly pointless poll anyway, Que sera, sera . I have very little expectation that humankind will do anything meaningful about climate change in the required time frame. Maybe when the oceans have become anoxic, and we can't grow food. But even then, I expect that the Americans will say that it's God's punishment for the sins of the human race and we shouldn't try to stop it anyway.

Quite how we took global action on CFC's is beyond me. Maybe they added magic mushrooms to the food served at the conference?

[Jantar]

For those who think the poll is poorly worded, please suggest some alternative wording.

The purpose is to find out what percentage of people on here are climate change deniers, not to discover the causes of climate change past and present.

[Night Falcon]

The climate has asked me to tell you all to please look the other way while its changing :nono:

[Ocean1]

Not sure if you worded the choices quite right.

Fairly pointless poll anyway, Que sera, sera . I have very little expectation that humankind will do anything meaningful about climate change in the required time frame. Maybe when the oceans have become anoxic, and we can't grow food. But even then, I expect that the Americans will say that it's God's punishment for the sins of the human race and we shouldn't try to stop it anyway.

Quite how we took global action on CFC's is beyond me. Maybe they added magic mushrooms to the food served at the conference?

What's the required time frame?

Only, in the time it's taken to actually invent climate change we've gone from Morris Minors to Higgs Boson.

Interpolate that over any likely significant climate change event and it's difficult to see how we wouldn't have the tools required to deal with it.

[yokel]

For those who think the poll is poorly worded, please suggest some alternative wording.

The purpose is to find out what percentage of people on here are climate change deniers, not to discover the causes of climate change past and present.


Well if you look at the results you'll see no one is a climate change denier.

Make it simple yes or no.

eg, is man made greenhouse emissions (mainly CO2) significantly if at all disrupting the climate? yes/no

Or has the worlds governments totally gone insane thinking they can or should control the climate? yes/no

[Virago]

For those who think the poll is poorly worded, please suggest some alternative wording.

The purpose is to find out what percentage of people on here are climate change deniers, not to discover the causes of climate change past and present.

Probably the most important one that doesn't fit any of the choices is:

"The climate did change before man started adding CO2, but has changed dramatically since."

Very few people would argue that climate doesn't change. The contentious point is - has man influenced it to our detriment?

[puddytat]

One question.....Are we responsible for Climate change?

Two answers.....yes or no.

[Jantar]

Well if you look at the results you'll see no one is a climate change denier.

Make it simple yes or no.

eg, is man made greenhouse emissions (mainly CO2) significantly if at all disrupting the climate? yes/no

Or has the worlds governments totally gone insane thinking they can or should control the climate? yes/no
That is to do with cause, nothing to do with whether or not anyone denies that the climate is changing. That discussion is more related to the other climate thread.

[Moise]

What's the required time frame?

Only, in the time it's taken to actually invent climate change we've gone from Morris Minors to Higgs Boson.

Interpolate that over any likely significant climate change event and it's difficult to see how we wouldn't have the tools required to deal with it.
Now would be good.

Remedial technologies are likely to involve planetary engineering at a fairly significant level. Prevention would be much simpler.

[Ocean1]

Now would be good.

Remedial technologies are likely to involve planetary engineering at a fairly significant level. Prevention would be much simpler.

I suppose. If you assume that there is significant damage being done, and that we're the only cause.

On the other hand, a facility with planetary engineering is required if significant damage is done at any time, no matter what the cause.

And now would be an excellent time to develop it, simple or otherwise.

And as long as the Luddites can be kept out of any such decision making this is unlikely to be the only planet we might want to engineer.

[yokel]

That is to do with cause, nothing to do with whether or not anyone denies that the climate is changing. That discussion is more related to the other climate thread.

Like I said, we all agree that the climate is changing.

[eldog]

According to the Hadcrut4 database (the one the IPCC uses), the rate of change for the 30 years from 1913 to 1942 is almost identical to the period from 1986 to 2015. So where is that accelerated rate of change?

Looks like I need to do some Google research

would rather see the first data set remove the WWI AND WWII data years

I suppose the depression era would have seen a downturn in industrial output.
does seem strange that the database would show a similar rate.

I see it doesnt include the 2 major sources of frozen H20 the Artic and Antarctic.
It also describes averaging the North and South Hemispheres data as they are at a different 'accuracy'.
I would have thought it better to deal with them separately and see if they have similar trands.
The data set also seems to only have data to 2010 unless I am reading the wrong site. The use the same data at each end of the set to extrapolate the trend to get a better fitting shape for the general trend.

I would like to see temp and Artic/Antartic land mass changes

[SPman]

The climate changed before man started adding CO2 and is changing again, in this instance due to man adding more CO2 than the planet can scrub.

[Jantar]

Looks like I need to do some Google research

would rather see the first data set remove the WWI AND WWII data years

I suppose the depression era would have seen a downturn in industrial output.
does seem strange that the database would show a similar rate.

I see it doesnt include the 2 major sources of frozen H20 the Artic and Antarctic.
It also describes averaging the North and South Hemispheres data as they are at a different 'accuracy'.
I would have thought it better to deal with them separately and see if they have similar trands.
The data set also seems to only have data to 2010 unless I am reading the wrong site. The use the same data at each end of the set to extrapolate the trend to get a better fitting shape for the general trend.

I would like to see temp and Artic/Antartic land mass changes
I see data right up to October this year http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut4/data/current/time_series/HadCRUT.4.4.0.0.monthly_ns_avg.txt
Or you can graph it at http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1855/to:2015

[eldog]

I see data right up to October this year http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut4/data/current/time_series/HadCRUT.4.4.0.0.monthly_ns_avg.txt
Or you can graph it at http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1855/to:2015

I read the blurb at the Hadley Centre web site, I didnt look much elsewhere.
pretty hard to on this device.....

The data and graphs on the metoffice.govt.uk (first couple of links on the Hadley site)
show a general trend of temp increases when compared to a 1960-1991

Obviously I have come in the middle of this thread and you have a lot more info.
So what if we go back further is there a way of determing global temp over the last thou/million years? does that coincide with glaciers formation/dissolve etc? and the Magnetic pole changes?

Humans have only being industrialised for a couple of thousand years.

OK, went back and REREAD thread

Yes I think the climate will always change
Yes I think the climate change is affected by humans, just the planet also changes to 'compensate'

[eldog]

The poll should have been worded could man ever halt climate change without screwing the world economy in the process eg satisfying the greenies wishes of leaving all oil and coal in the ground. I think not.

I wonder what life would be like with no oil, gas and coal and no burning of trees.....

[Moi]

I just want to find out how many Climate change Deniers there are on this site.

Having declared your reason for the poll, I believe you will not get the information you are wanting.

Why? If a forum member were to be a climate change denier and is a regular user / reader of this forum, then that forum member would be well aware that standing outside what is considered the norm or perceived to be the correct answer and declaring that position can lead to public ridicule and, possibly, private attacks. So, I would suggest that a forum member who is climate change denier is not likely to respond truthfully to this poll or is going to ignore it.

[jonbuoy]

I would vote for "not sure if we have changed the climate but we sure have fucked up the environment with pollution- land sea and air"

[iYRe]

I just want to find out how many Climate change Deniers there are on this site.

Poorly chosen phrase.

What you mean is "just want to find out how many people do not believe C02 emissions cause climate change"

Because, its a fact that C02 does NOT have an effect on global temperature, and the climate does change.

Instead of blowing hot air about this farcical criminal c02 scam, we should be investing our time and money into more important things... saving endangered species, reforestation, and better roads with less cars so we can spend our days riding peacefully through our new forests looking at all the amazing critters.

If you still think C02 has an effect, have a read through some of this guy's posts, where he shows the evidence of climate fraud: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/ (there is so much of it that he posts new stuff like 10 times a day)

[iYRe]

Greenie Heaven
Cold, wet, dirty, and a helluva lot shorter than it is now... one suspects.

[iYRe]

But bliss for the Greenies or they won't be staying Greenies for long.

Very probably :P

[Jantar]

....

What you mean is "just want to find out how many people do not believe C02 emissions cause climate change"

Because, its a fact that C02 does NOT have an effect on global temperature, and the climate does change.

..........
If you still think C02 has an effect, have a read through some of this guy's posts, where he shows the evidence of climate fraud: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/ (there is so much of it that he posts new stuff like 10 times a day)
Maybe you need to read some of Steven Goddard's (not his real name BTW) work more closely. He does agree that CO2 affects the climate, and by the same amount I have already stated: 1.2K per doubling. That is amount discovered by John Tindal in 1856, and can replicated in any lab today. It is an amount very much smaller than that claimed by IPCC.

The change in climate caused by CO2 is swamped by natural variation, and is almost undetectable. It requires very sophisticated algorithms to even try and separate CO2 forcing from natural changes.

[Akzle]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D1uaw3WIOlc

[eldog]

Greenie Heaven

Eskimo Time

and I know that I can get a suntan much quicker these days than I could when I was a youngster. But that's UV light.

Never really been a greenie myself, but hate people doing dumb shit when it can be avoided.

Maybe its a conspiracy......:crazy:

[iYRe]

Maybe you need to read some of Steven Goddard's (not his real name BTW) work more closely. He does agree that CO2 affects the climate, and by the same amount I have already stated: 1.2K per doubling. That is amount discovered by John Tindal in 1856, and can replicated in any lab today. It is an amount very much smaller than that claimed by IPCC.

The change in climate caused by CO2 is swamped by natural variation, and is almost undetectable. It requires very sophisticated algorithms to even try and separate CO2 forcing from natural changes.

Yes, however, that just confuses things for the wombats who still believe C02 *causes* CC.
The most important thing he brings to light, imho, is the complete and utter fraud of the whole deal, and how blatantly they manipulate the data with impunity... no one cares, because they make money out of it

[yokel]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D1uaw3WIOlc


Ah yes George Carlin, I think he makes some good points.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BB0aFPXr4n4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Woodman]

Ah yes George Carlin, I think he makes some good points.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BB0aFPXr4n4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That was good shit:clap::clap:

[jonbuoy]

Eskimo Time

and I know that I can get a suntan much quicker these days than I could when I was a youngster. But that's UV light.

Never really been a greenie myself, but hate people doing dumb shit when it can be avoided.

Maybe its a conspiracy......:crazy:

Even in the peak of summer here I can spend a couple of hours out in the sun without getting nuked- never get burnt through my scalp and never bother with sun cream behind my ears. Who would have thought the relatively small amounts of cfc's we released could have made such a difference.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Even in the peak of summer here I can spend a couple of hours out in the sun without getting nuked- never get burnt through my scalp and never bother with sun cream behind my ears. Who would have thought the relatively small amounts of cfc's we released could have made such a difference.

Or the likely bigger culprit (thousands of nuclear bomb tests). No finger pointing there though.

[TheDemonLord]

Or the likely bigger culprit (thousands of nuclear bomb tests). No finger pointing there though.

you do realize that the sun is basically a giant Thermonuclear explosion right? and that Radiation (Gamma Radiation specifically) almost never interferes with chemical compounds?

[Akzle]

you do realize that the sun is basically a giant Thermonuclear explosion right? and that Radiation almost never interferes with chemical compounds?

oh for fucksake.
The more you post, the dumber you sound.

[jonbuoy]

Or the likely bigger culprit (thousands of nuclear bomb tests). No finger pointing there though.

Any credible/scientific evidence to back that up?

[Berries]

I just felt that whatever it was I just voted for looked lonely.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Any credible/scientific evidence to back that up?

Nothing that comes close to the 97% falsified twaddle that seems to pass for truth these days. Ain't no meaningful studies been carried out. Just theories which are a long way from certain. Chlorine activation, ash clouds etc. Google it if you're interested (Not something I see as worth my time tbh).

[jonbuoy]

What if they are right and we don't even try and make some changes? What's the worst case scenario? Slightly less pollution?

[R650R]

What if they are right and we don't even try and make some changes? What's the worst case scenario? Slightly less pollution?

The worst case scenario is living under a technocratic dictatorship that via technology decides when you can use the device you own/paid for. That you will pay mega bucks more in taxes and passed down charges in the name of various climate levies and carbon taxes. Even at lesser levels all the solutions will massively impact our standard of living either through paying more taxes, limited when you can use stuff or paying big dollars for higher tech 'cleaner' emmisions gear.
Imagine if tomorrow the govt decreed your fridge/washing machine/tv/PC etc uses too much power and you must junk them and replace with brand x etc.....

Its just like the higher ACC levies for bikes, it has no impact on the desired outcome, people are already riding as safe as they can manage and buy the best protection they can afford. The clear fraud of the whole scam is that you can carry on polluting as long as you pay carbon taxes. All we are doing is making manufacturing uneconomic in developed countries and transferring the pollution to places like china and india who wills till emit the co2 thereby still affecting the climate (if co2 actually did).....

[awa355]

Yeah, right.



[QUOTE]The president took credit for the successful negotiations. "Today, the American people can be proud - because this historic agreement is a tribute to American leadership. Over the past seven years, we've transformed the United States into the global leader in fighting climate change.

Top Republicans in Congress dismissed the pact as nothing more than a long-term planning document and said Obama was making promises he won't be able to keep. They say his commitment to reduce emissions from US power plants would cost thousands of American jobs and raise electricity costs.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Obama is "writing checks he can't cash and stepping over the middle class to take credit for an 'agreement' that is subject to being shredded in 13 months."

[jonbuoy]

The worst case scenario is living under a technocratic dictatorship that via technology decides when you can use the device you own/paid for. That you will pay mega bucks more in taxes and passed down charges in the name of various climate levies and carbon taxes. Even at lesser levels all the solutions will massively impact our standard of living either through paying more taxes, limited when you can use stuff or paying big dollars for higher tech 'cleaner' emmisions gear.
Imagine if tomorrow the govt decreed your fridge/washing machine/tv/PC etc uses too much power and you must junk them and replace with brand x etc.....

Its just like the higher ACC levies for bikes, it has no impact on the desired outcome, people are already riding as safe as they can manage and buy the best protection they can afford. The clear fraud of the whole scam is that you can carry on polluting as long as you pay carbon taxes. All we are doing is making manufacturing uneconomic in developed countries and transferring the pollution to places like china and india who wills till emit the co2 thereby still affecting the climate (if co2 actually did).....

And if they are right and we do nothing? When the air is so polluted in cities it's not safe to breathe and you can't see across the street - something has to change. It's already happening slowly - 100watt filament light bulbs are banned and other filament lamps are being phased out.

[Akzle]

And if they are right and we do nothing? When the air is so polluted in cities it's not safe to breathe and you can't see across the street - something has to change. It's already happening slowly - 100watt filament light bulbs are banned and other filament lamps are being phased out.

yeah. So hows all those icemaker upright fridge freezers, the bajillion inch plasma tvs (3 per house) always on cellphones, tablets, pcs, laptops, hairdryers, toasters, resistive water heaters, heat pumps, aircon (always on because house design is so fucking inefficient).... The 2000w of lighting you use for <4hrs a day is gnatts piss compared to the rest.

Inefficiency in the name of convinience.
Yay society.

(i also, find already that the air in town is too polluted to comfortably breathe)

[jonbuoy]

yeah. So hows all those icemaker upright fridge freezers, the bajillion inch plasma tvs (3 per house) always on cellphones, tablets, pcs, laptops, hairdryers, toasters, resistive water heaters, heat pumps, aircon (always on because house design is so fucking inefficient).... The 2000w of lighting you use for <4hrs a day is gnatts piss compared to the rest.

Inefficiency in the name of convinience.
Yay society.

(i also, find already that the air in town is too polluted to comfortably breathe)

More than 4 hours a day in a lot of places. If you can light your whole house using the same power as one 100w filament light that's a win for you. 4watt LEDs kick out more light than a 40watt lightbulb good quality LEDs are hard to distinguish from a filament bulb - apart from the fact they don't get hot. New houses have better insulation computers, fridges, freezers, aircon are all getting more efficient.

[mashman]

And if they are right and we do nothing?

Reckon we might have an earthquake one day? Perhaps a tsunami? Maybe a volcanic eruption or meteor strike? Are we prepared for any of those things? No. Even though they have always existed, feck all has been done. Haiti is still in the shitter after an earthquake. Something about not being able to afford the resources they need to put a roof over everyone's head... let alone the highest quality of building that's designed to handle earthquakes a little better. Not an issue under RBE ;).

[jonbuoy]

Reckon we might have an earthquake one day? Perhaps a tsunami? Maybe a volcanic eruption or meteor strike? Are we prepared for any of those things? No. Even though they have always existed, feck all has been done. Haiti is still in the shitter after an earthquake. Something about not being able to afford the resources they need to put a roof over everyone's head... let alone the highest quality of building that's designed to handle earthquakes a little better. Not an issue under RBE ;).

We aren't able to control any of those events- for sure we're all going to face extinction one day - doesn't stop most people from doing what they can to look after themselves.

[mashman]

We aren't able to control any of those events- for sure we're all going to face extinction one day - doesn't stop most people from doing what they can to look after themselves.

It's not about control is it? It's about mitigation innit? i.e. should things go tits to the point that 99% of the population are wiped out, there's still a 1% that have to survive. We make that survival harder the more we ignore that reality. It's an extreme example, but it still shows that we really are doing nothing about it. May as well just keep setting goals and burning shit until the jury is in lol.

[Akzle]

More than 4 hours a day in a lot of places. If you can light your whole house using the same power as one 100w filament light that's a win for you. 4watt LEDs kick out more light than a 40watt lightbulb good quality LEDs are hard to distinguish from a filament bulb - apart from the fact they don't get hot. New houses have better insulation computers, fridges, freezers, aircon are all getting more efficient.

yes but the principal design is inefficient. Uprights dump all the cold out every time you open the door.
heating, insulation and aircon become redundant in a house designed around passive solar/cooling, air flow and thermal mass.


Yes. Any decrease in consumption is good. But it's a bit like turning the fuel pump down an a turbosupercharged downdraughted v8, when you could use a carolla instead.

[oldrider]

Data or Dogma? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GujLcfdovE8 Grist for the mill? :scratch: . :corn:

[TheDemonLord]

(i also, find already that the air in town is too polluted to comfortably breathe)

You could try not breathing :lol::lol:

However - some Head on Nail action is in your latter post:


yes but the principal design is inefficient. Uprights dump all the cold out every time you open the door.
heating, insulation and aircon become redundant in a house designed around passive solar/cooling, air flow and thermal mass.

Yes. Any decrease in consumption is good. But it's a bit like turning the fuel pump down an a turbosupercharged downdraughted v8, when you could use a carolla instead.

It's almost like you are saying - we could do things better to reduce our environmental impact without any major decrease in the current comforts we enjoy.....

That and bring on Fusion Power.

[Akzle]

You could try not breathing :lol::lol:
or. Since you're a fat cunt, as well as a town-dwelling commuting and consuming faggot, and ergo more of a drain on my oxygenic resauce: you.


It's almost like you are saying - we could do things better to reduce our environmental impact without any major decrease in the current comforts we enjoy.....

That and bring on Fusion Power.

a) no.
b) no.

Although i envision chest fridges with hydraulic pop up shelf drawers.

Copyright ax.

F&p do fridge drawers, ridiculous price, and somehow not as efficient as they should be, but moving in the right direction.

[TheDemonLord]

or. Since you're a fat cunt, as well as a town-dwelling commuting and consuming faggot, and ergo more of a drain on my oxygenic resauce: you.

I contribute more :msn-wink:




a) no.
b) no.

Although i envision chest fridges with hydraulic pop up shelf drawers.

Copyright ax.

F&p do fridge drawers, ridiculous price, and somehow not as efficient as they should be, but moving in the right direction.
You say no, but then agree with my point - that with advances in technology we can have less impact on the environment whilst maintaining lifestyle.

And why you no like Fusion?

[jonbuoy]

I bet if the govt introduced an earthquake and volcano tax as well as this emissions tax there would still be fools thinking the additional taxes will stop them happening as well and be happy to pay even more tax.

It's crazy we have to resort to taxing polluters rather than voluntarily sorting our own shit out but big industry/business won't do anything unless it affects the bean counters bottom line.

[Akzle]

I contribute more :msn-wink:

thoroughly arguable




You say no, but then agree with my point - that with advances in technology

refrigeration technology is essentially the same as the 60s, just with r134 and the like in place of ammonia.
Chest freezers have existed for just as long.
Why no cunt has put 1 and 1 together with the physics of cold....? Inconvinience.
remote mounting a compressor (rather than having it under what youre trying to cool - duh!), building fridges into houses rather than selling every cunt one? (PROFIT !!1101!)

and the "technology" of thermal mass and sun has been comprehended for long. (long before crackerfullas stole the world) So why isnt every building in nz a net energy exporter? Why is there centralised waste processing, power distribution, etc? Instead of everyone dealing with their own shit on their own place?
Passive cooling (cellars and cold stores ie) are non fucking existant, rather than mandatory, in nz.

[yokel]

If this LENR actually works? that would be a game changer.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EgpJ81ZLnMs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[TheDemonLord]

thoroughly arguable

Indeed - but we would need to agree on the Metrics used first :lol::lol::lol:


refrigeration technology is essentially the same as the 60s, just with r134 and the like in place of ammonia.
Chest freezers have existed for just as long.
Why no cunt has put 1 and 1 together with the physics of cold....? Inconvinience.
remote mounting a compressor (rather than having it under what youre trying to cool - duh!), building fridges into houses rather than selling every cunt one? (PROFIT !!1101!)

See - not silly ideas - the problem here is that houses existed before fridges - so when fridges were invented, people with houses bought them. When they moved house, they took the Fridge with them. As you say - Convenience is an important factor (where are the Electric cars?).

A Fridge built into a house is actually pretty cool (THE PUN!) to the point that were I to build my own house - I'll actually seriously consider it.


and the "technology" of thermal mass and sun has been comprehended for long. (long before crackerfullas stole the world) So why isnt every building in nz a net energy exporter? Why is there centralised waste processing, power distribution, etc? Instead of everyone dealing with their own shit on their own place?
Passive cooling (cellars and cold stores ie) are non fucking existant, rather than mandatory, in nz.

Cellars in Flood and Earthquake prone areas are recipes for disaster (just look at all the issues with Houses that flooded with cellars during Hurrican Katrina) however I'd counter that I'm pretty sure it was the Greeks and Romans (pretty Cracker Fullas) that really turned it into a documented science (although maybe the Chinese did something similar, but that wouldn't have influenced western architecture)

As for everyone sorting their own shit - Economies of Scale and the efficiencies of centralization are desirable (even the Romans had worked this out)

[Akzle]

Indeed - but we would need to agree on the Metrics used first :lol::lol::lol:

Cellars in Flood and Earthquake prone areas are recipes for disaster

As for everyone sorting their own shit - Economies of Scale and the efficiencies of centralization are desirable (even the Romans had worked this out)

any

we use this marvelous shit called reinforced concrete. Building cities on sand is fucking stupid, even jesus knew this.
And there are building methods that move with an eartquake and survive, rather than trying to brace against it (and failing).

Centralisation requires distribution. Every which way you paint it, distribution if far less efficient than locally sourced, used, recycled shit.

The line losses on electricty distribution are enough to power a city full of your mums dildos.

The reticulation network for water, sewerage etc... Inefficient, and large ongoing maintenance requirements.

[TheDemonLord]

we use this marvelous shit called reinforced concrete. Building cities on sand is fucking stupid, even jesus knew this.
And there are building methods that move with an eartquake and survive, rather than trying to brace against it (and failing).

Reinforced concrete is great - but it's only strong under compression - which is why it doesn't do too well in an Earthquake. Also interesting is that Basements aren't common in Japan aswell (probably one of the world leaders on Earthquake construction)


Centralisation requires distribution. Every which way you paint it, distribution if far less efficient than locally sourced, used, recycled shit.

Not necessarily, sometimes the cost of distribution is massively offset by the gain in efficiency via economies of Scale - case in point is AC vs DC current and our current electrical grid.


The line losses on electricty distribution are enough to power a city full of your mums dildos.

So no loss at all then, cause Dildos don't use any power - A Vibrator on the other hand...


The reticulation network for water, sewerage etc... Inefficient, and large ongoing maintenance requirements.

Having one plant, servicing 100,000 homes (hypothetical) with 100 people looking after it - is that more or less effecient than having 100 plants servicing 1000 homes each, with each plant requiring 2 people to look after it.

Even more so when you consider would the 1000 homes generate enough input so that the 100 plants can operate at peak effeciency?

[Akzle]

Reinforced concrete is great - but it's only strong under compression - which is why it doesn't do too well in an Earthquake. Also interesting is that Basements aren't common in Japan aswell (probably one of the world leaders on Earthquake construction)

:facepalm:
which is why they reinforce it, with steel


Not necessarily, sometimes the cost of distribution is massively offset by the gain in efficiency via economies of Scale - case in point is AC vs DC current and our current electrical grid.
you're confusing voltage and current. highvoltage dc travels as well as highvoltage ac, just the mechanics of converting it to usable voltages is more involved:
The problem with dc is rectification both from generation, and then at the other end.

Irrelevant, but, if the power only has to travel from your roof to your tv.


Having one plant, servicing 100,000 homes (hypothetical) with 100 people looking after it - is that more or less effecient than having 100 plants servicing 1000 homes each, with each plant requiring 2 people to look after it.

Even more so when you consider would the 1000 homes generate enough input so that the 100 plants can operate at peak effeciency?

no. When 1000 homes maintain their own shit, reuse it in the garden to grow their own veges... And then 1000 guys can go fishing instead of muck diving.

Plus, the treatment of septic sludge is fucking stupid. Wet toilets are a fucking huge inefficiency.

[oldrider]

Surely we are too smart for that!: <iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NAmGnyj0u7E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[TheDemonLord]

:facepalm:
which is why they reinforce it, with steel

But the CTV building was Reinforced Concrete.... and multitudes of Reinforced concrete buildings have collapsed in Earthquakes the main issue from memory is the swaying effect stretches the concrete on one side, which then chips and cracks, loosing its structural strength, then when it sways back, the cracked side has more play in it, further weakening the structure.



you're confusing voltage and current. highvoltage dc travels as well as highvoltage ac, just the mechanics of converting it to usable voltages is more involved:
The problem with dc is rectification both from generation, and then at the other end.

No - I'm really not - you said it yourself, AC is simpler - which is why it was the winning method of Electricity distribution.


no. When 1000 homes maintain their own shit, reuse it in the garden to grow their own veges... And then 1000 guys can go fishing instead of muck diving.

Plus, the treatment of septic sludge is fucking stupid. Wet toilets are a fucking huge inefficiency.

A: I don't want to deal with my own shit, that's why I pay someone else to do it.
B: Whilst I agree Wet Toilets are massively inefficient, there are other benefits to using them - mainly in the sanitation and control of the spread of disease. Compare a country or location that doesn't use wet toilets and when things like Dysentery, Cholera etc. break out.

[puddytat]

According to a media release from a Green spokesperson for the NZ govt emissions target to be met 80% of oil has to be left in the ground now. If that happend we can kiss goodbye to the economy and prepare for a return to the stone age.
You are a fucking luddite....

[jonbuoy]

You mean we can't use all the oil at once and have to conserve it and economise? Damn I was thinking we should just suck it all out now so we have a great lifestyle for the next 50 years and then head back to the stoneage.

[Voltaire]

thoroughly arguable





refrigeration technology is essentially the same as the 60s, just with r134 and the like in place of ammonia.
Chest freezers have existed for just as long.
Why no cunt has put 1 and 1 together with the physics of cold....? Inconvinience.
remote mounting a compressor (rather than having it under what youre trying to cool - duh!), building fridges into houses rather than selling every cunt one? (PROFIT !!1101!)

and the "technology" of thermal mass and sun has been comprehended for long. (long before crackerfullas stole the world) So why isnt every building in nz a net energy exporter? Why is there centralised waste processing, power distribution, etc? Instead of everyone dealing with their own shit on their own place?
Passive cooling (cellars and cold stores ie) are non fucking existant, rather than mandatory, in nz.

134 in place of Ammonia? :laugh::laugh:....you need to improve you Google Skills.
Also Ammonia is a natural substance, not nice to work with though....if it leaks run like you stole it.:msn-wink:

[SPman]

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa36/JonL_photo/Santa_zpsqbvwyqdu.jpg (http://s198.photobucket.com/user/JonL_photo/media/Santa_zpsqbvwyqdu.jpg.html)....................... ......

[scumdog]

You can tell it's a joke 'cos there's no penguins at the north pole..:wait:

[carbonhed]

You can tell it's a joke 'cos there's no penguins at the north pole..:wait:

:laugh: Well spotted.

[seattle smitty]

I posted this to a thread that must have already run its course, so:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/176981-Take-the-100-000-Global-Warming-Believer-Challenge!/page10


Your poll needed another option, something like: "The climate has always undergone changes; the present change has been augmented by the effects of human activity."

[oldrider]

Activity (or lack of) of the sun and it's effect on climate change? (scary shit!) :cold:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DueVWamHmYs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>