[ImanCarrot]

Hmm popcorn :::hands out popcorn:::

How much you guys paying for petrol (gas) as a matter of interest?


I did a quick calculation- here in the UK it's around £1.13 per litre (and rising).

Now, 1 litre= 0.264 US gallon (liquid).

= £1.13 per 0.264 US gallon (lquid).

= £4.28 per 1 US gallon (liquid).

at an exchange rate of roughly £1 = $1.97 that comes out at:

$8.43 per US gallon. That's what we're paying.

Just thought I'd let you know you got it easy lol.

[fizzissist]

That's the problem with private enterprise, no buffer zone (tax payer's input) to keep going.

Ian.

So, you're a socialist or a communist?

[handlewanker]

Hi Carrot, we also call it petrol in OZ, not gas, that's a stateside expression, gasoleum.

If you want gas in OZ its LPG, at about $0.69 per litre, they used to burn the stuff off in the Bass Straits oil fields 'til someone discovered you could burn cars with it.

At the moment unleaded is $1.35 a litre during the week and mysteriously gets up to $1.50 a litre by the weekend.

Don't know about premium unleaded probably starts at about $1.50 or so.

The last time I checked (months back) the pound was worth $2.20

I've been tempted to have my veehikkal converted to LPG, but I'd lose some boot space, and on a Mercedes that would be sacrilege.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

Now Now Fizzwizz, no more of that "reds under the beds crap", you might offend some people your country would like to be friends with.

I know you lot in cloud cuckoo land are paranoid about the socialists getting hold of your economy, but lets face it man, you owe your souls to every socialist government that has ever been in power, and that's in any foreign land you've been in.

The way you're leaders are performing with the freedom of expression they allow you it's a wonder you haven't had a socialist government years ago.

Just imagine that, no Berlin wall, and instead of bombing the living sh1t out of North Vietnam you'd have sent delegates to them to cement relationships with all the other Commie countries you tried to influence, same with Korea, a united Korea, how about that everyone living in peace, and the Russians your best mates, Jack Daniels Vodka, can't be bad, what an awesome alliance, you could have had Mandarin Chinese as a second official language.

What would you have called yourselves, The United Union of Socialistically Inclined States, sounds good, UUSIS

Only one big drawback, 007 would have had to go on pension never having fired a shot in anger, aw gee I did so like his films.

Now that you are practically mortgaged up to the eyeballs to China due to buying all their exports and paying with paper money, maybe corn will be better, you'd better re-evaluate your options, they're a big market, and if you lot have an ounce of intelligence you'd realise that they really like you, and could be your salvation, just takes a bit of intelligence, but according to Jh and others there aint much of that going around in the Halls of Montezuma, so I suppose you have to do the best with what you've got, God help you.

Just between you and I, the Ethanol problem will probably just fizzle out and then you lot can mass produce those new solar panels the guy in california is making, 20-30% more efficient and 1/5th the cost, what are you waiting for?
This has got to be the answer to the energy crisis.
Ian.

[CNC_Programmer]

Now Now Fizzwizz, no more of that "reds under the beds crap", you might offend some people your country would like to be friends with.

I know you lot in cloud cuckoo land are paranoid about the socialists getting hold of your economy, but lets face it man, you owe your souls to every socialist government that has ever been in power, and that's in any foreign land you've been in.

The way you're leaders are performing with the freedom of expression they allow you it's a wonder you haven't had a socialist government years ago.

Just imagine that, no Berlin wall, and instead of bombing the living sh1t out of North Vietnam you'd have sent delegates to them to cement relationships with all the other Commie countries you tried to influence, same with Korea, a united Korea, how about that everyone living in peace, and the Russians your best mates, Jack Daniels Vodka, can't be bad, what an awesome alliance, you could have had Mandarin Chinese as a second official language.

What would you have called yourselves, The United Union of Socialistically Inclined States, sounds good, UUSIS

Only one big drawback, 007 would have had to go on pension never having fired a shot in anger, aw gee I did so like his films.

Now that you are practically mortgaged up to the eyeballs to China due to buying all their exports and paying with paper money, maybe corn will be better, you'd better re-evaluate your options, they're a big market, and if you lot have an ounce of intelligence you'd realise that they really like you, and could be your salvation, just takes a bit of intelligence, but according to Jh and others there aint much of that going around in the Halls of Montezuma, so I suppose you have to do the best with what you've got, God help you.

Just between you and I, the Ethanol problem will probably just fizzle out and then you lot can mass produce those new solar panels the guy in california is making, 20-30% more efficient and 1/5th the cost, what are you waiting for?
This has got to be the answer to the energy crisis.
Ian.

Talk about out of touch with reality!!!!!!! Can't get much farther than that!

[Geof]

Talk about out of touch with reality!!!!!!! Can't get much farther than that!

Actually he is not totally out of touch, this part is pretty much correct:

Now that you are practically mortgaged up to the eyeballs to China due to buying all their exports and paying with paper money.......

[fizzissist]

Now Now Fizzwizz, no more of that "reds under the beds crap", you might offend some people your country would like to be friends with.

I know you lot in cloud cuckoo land are paranoid .........Ian.

I asked a simple question of you, whether you were a socialist or a communist.

What I got instead was a diatribe about being paranoid, a personal slur with the "reds under the beds crap" comment, and my country insulted as being either stupid, naive, or both with the "cloud cuckoo land" comment.

My country's debt issues are another subject altogether, and I'm not a McCarthy clone, so your answer is nothing more than evasively insulting at best.

Again, which are you? Socialist or communist?

[handlewanker]

Fizzwizz, does it really matter?

My preferences are reserved for the ballot box.

You don't have to have a list to starboard or port to function, and sitting on the fence means you're going to cop the flack from both sides, like someone running up the middle of the road.

Surely Socialism is "by the people for the people with the people", whereas Communism is "with the people, by the people but not necessarily for the people"

Your concern is bordering on hysteria, tantamount to paranoia, seeing as how you've asked that same question twice.

What's the difference anyway, in your "humble opinion"?
Ian.

[martinw]

Hmm popcorn :::hands out popcorn:::

How much you guys paying for petrol (gas) as a matter of interest?


I did a quick calculation- here in the UK it's around £1.13 per litre (and rising).

That's what we're paying.

Just thought I'd let you know you got it easy lol.

Dear ImanCarrot,

A litre of diesel cost me £1.29 last Sunday. I guess it's time to oil the bike chain and get back in the saddle.

Come to think of it, the lube will probably cost a King's Ransom....

Best wishes,

Martin

[handlewanker]

JH, Simply and utterly without parallel an echo from the past, that is quoting someone else's comments 'cause you're at a loss for words.

I'll give you some kind words of advice JH, ignore the things that you disagree with if you haven't got a logical answer for them, and make a few observations from your own store of cryptic comments, whilst at the same time injecting into the proceedings a degree of tolerence that will not only win you friends and respect, but boost your standing and credibility as someone who can see further than the edge of the pail.

I made a few observations a post or two back, and if you have anything to add or even refute, let us have them so that we may inwardly digest your comments and reply with a suitable modicum of civility as befits the occasion.

I realise that it is difficult for you to grasp the meaning of some references, and whilst I may disagree with your line of reasoning, as well as other contributors, it is understood that you have the divine right to express yourself as you see fit, even if you are requested to edit your comments later, that is your prerogative, chiseled in stone, in your constitution, which incidently does not apply to the rest of the world.

The more important issues are the concern that the rest of the world, especially the low lying areas, has for the ramifications that global warming could have dire effects on their life styles and lead to a mass migration to pastures new, provided there are enough pastures that haven't been allocated to Ethanol production.

Consider this for one moment, if ten million people world wide were to suddenly find themselves in danger of becoming inundated by rising waters, would the world economy be able to ingest within their populations that many people adding to the already swelling numbers of population they already are trying to accomodate.

I think you will find that if the USA were asked to rehouse on a refugee basis just ONE million refugees within their infrastructure, they would politely decline on the basis that at this moment in time all the available land not seen as necessary for food production is being gobbled up to further the desire of the car users.

Correct me if I'm wrong, already your economy is practically bankrupt, which means that with the productive capability of your present facilities, you will not be able to pay the interest on the outstanding debt your country carries.

So how would your people feel if they were asked to shoulder the burden of another million extra mouths to feed, clothe and house, apart from intergrating a group that is socially and fundamentally different to your culture and lifestyle?

I can imagine a presidential wannabe wishing the problem would just go away in a million different directions, if he/she thought it would influence the voting preferences of the people.

There is going to be a climatic variation, to say otherwise is flying in the face of scientific knowledge.

Too dry and your crops won't yield the full two bobs worth necessary to feed your people, power your cars etc, while on the other hand, too wet and you will get a down turn in the tourist industry with corresponding crop failures due to hurricanes etc.

At this moment in time you are driven by not profit, to have profit you must have an excess of consumption that can be sold for gain, it is just to make ends meet in the ever growing rush to exceed the difference between the price of the corn crop and the sale of the Ethanol it will produce.

According to the experts, the Ethanol will cost more than the oil it's supposed to replace, where is the sanity of executive decision in that one? I take it the decision is coming from the top?
Ian.

[ynneb]

The last 12 posts by jhowelb he has said "Edited out of protest" and he has even made new posts just to say the same thing(3 times in one post). His final post was a quote without any additional information added. He is demonstrating a pattern of taunting and annoyance.

I have deleted these posts. This is the first time in years I have had to take such action and I am quite embarrassed that I have been forced to.

Thanks to those members who went back and fixed their posts according to self moderation. I appreciate that.

If anyone feels they need to protest against my decision, please send me a PM as any off topic conversation in this thread will also be deleted.

[Mariss Freimanis]

1) "Consider this for one moment, if ten million people world wide were to suddenly find themselves in danger of becoming inundated by rising waters"

2) "Too dry and your crops won't yield the full two bobs worth necessary to feed your people, power your cars etc, while on the other hand, too wet and you will get a down turn in the tourist industry with corresponding crop failures due to hurricanes etc."

This is screamingly funny. Truly, I'm falling off of my chair laughing.

"Suddenly inundated". My god, how desperate and shrill can you get? Now global warming produces a tsunami that will "suddenly" inundate hapless and innocent peasants tilling their fields in Holland and Bangladesh? Rooted to the spot they will watch as a 100' (30m) tsunami heated to 104F (40C) by global warming wipes them and their earthly belongings from the face of the earth? The few (100,000,000) survivors will swim or be swept to our fair shores to overwhelm our welfare system? Please stop or I'll gag laughing!

"too wet,.. too dry" Another good one! Got to hand it to you, everything is going to be bad, real bad! Nothing will be good; we're all going to die! Deserts will become jungles and swamps, swamps and jungles will become deserts. You can't have it both ways; you have overreached with your hilarious hyperbole. I enjoy it because it is so transparently funny!

Please save the hyperventilating used car salesman global warming sales-pitch for a more gullible audience. The people here are simply too educated and informed to consider it as anything but an avenue of amusement at your expense. Preserve your dignity, man.

P.S. to moderator: Please note no personal reputations were slandered, delicate feelings intentionally offended or otherwise harmed during the production of this reply. Offered was a heartfelt and helpful Dutch Uncle advice to a respected and esteemed member on this thread.

Mariss

[fizzissist]

The more important issues are the concern that the rest of the world, especially the low lying areas, has for the ramifications that global warming could have dire effects.......... suddenly find themselves in danger of becoming inundated by rising waters,....

WHAT actual data can you present to support that nonsensical claim? Are you suggesting that a couple of millimeters (~3/32" for all you people who use "gas") sea level rise/yr constitutes "sudden"??

This is so typical of your arguments. Scientific innuendo, but no substance.

[fizzissist]

The last 12 posts by jhowelb he has said "Edited out of protest" and he has even made new posts just to say the same thing(3 times in one post). His final post was a quote without any additional information added. He is demonstrating a pattern of taunting and annoyance.

I have deleted these posts. This is the first time in years I have had to take such action and I am quite embarrassed that I have been forced to.

Thanks to those members who went back and fixed their posts according to self moderation. I appreciate that.

If anyone feels they need to protest against my decision, please send me a PM as any off topic conversation in this thread will also be deleted.

ynneb,
I am posting this publicly because I want a public answer, and believe that given the situation, it IS and has become 'on topic'.

handlewanker has repeatedly thrown very pointed barbs at the U.S. and it's citizens. While not directly "personal", they are at best skirting the forum rules you claim to protect. These repeated slurs have all the character and intent of being very personal, as they are being directed at individuals.

I would offer as example his statement "...I know you lot in cloud cuckoo land.."

If your official ruling is that this and his other derogatory comments are NOT veiled personal attacks, then fine. I'm ok with that. What I believe fair is a simple ruling, so that if what he writes is acceptable under your rules, then I'm free to write in kind.

[ynneb]

Do we really need to perpetuate this publicly?
I have encouraged personal moderating to which most have complied. Some too much

I am still encouraging personal moderating. If some dont comply, could we show a bit of grace and carry on with the topic anyway.
This is a lose lose situation. If I dont moderate, I am asked were are you. If I do moderate, one side squeals its not fair. To this end I am just asking for common sense, from all the individual posters. If they get out of hand I'll ask again.

As I said its a gray area, but can easily get out of hand. ( As we have seen) If a member does feel like another member is out of order, its probably best to ignore them and carry on with the topic anyway.

That been said, if a poster is way out of line just use the report post button.

To answer your specific question, No it is not OK to denigrate another's country. But referring to the countries ideas and practices is. Having different ideas about how that country should behave is fine, but making up derogatory names for it is not.

To those who think their choice of smart words and sentence structures will get around this, can I just say, it fools no one, and works against you.

I will let this post and the previous post stand for one day and then remove both so that we can keep to the topic.

[handlewanker]

M.F. I'm flattered, a respected and esteemed member huh?

I think it would profit you much to just analyse the content of the post and give your opinion as brief and concise as you think fit, without adopting a fawning and sneering attitude to a carefully worded work piece.

The two passages of text you refer to, are dealing with two different scenarios, and as you have seen fit to lump them together to form another and totally out of context situation, I am at a loss for words to understand the point you are trying to make.

I will add, or maybe clarify the "sudden" scenario that perturbs you so much and leaves you in a state of shock/horror at such a thought.

It is this, faced with the prospect of losing your home, power base and all that you hold dear, would you procrastinate and put off tearing up your roots so that at the last moment when all the good parts have been taken you would be left with the scraps to start a new life with?

A very real threat is something you take to heart, like a large part of Hawaii breaking away and falling into the sea, which I believe is a very real threat and is being carefully monitored.

If that were to happen the "sudden" exodus would be very rapid indeed, especially for all the habitats along the Pacific coast lines.

While that does not constitute an aspect of global climate change, the scenario of a mass of refugees requiring the basics from an economy already staggering under the burden of gross mismanagment, leads me to think that they would be given the cold shoulder and told to move on.

Why do you feel this is so disturbing?

Do you think this will affect your comfort zone?

At this very moment in time, to some people a plastic sheet draped round a few sticks is the only comfort zone they "suddenly" have.

The way I see it is this, with the Ethanol scenario being in vogue IE everybody wants a slice of the pie, and the bigger and fatter you can make the pie the more you're gonna get out of it.

So pretty soon with the farmers ALL wanting to maximise their yields and having bought up all the useable land available, the next step is to turn to the Scientists and Biologists in order to artificially boost the yield.

This would entail producing a super strain of corn that doubles the yield and maximises the use of the super fertilizer that goes with it, along with the huge amounts of water needed to ensure that when the sun shines and the rains don't, all will be well.

In the cold hard light of day, the lessons of the past are forgotten, and the new super crop is attacked by a new and pesticide resistent super bug.

Putting all your eggs in one basket is a phrase well known and understood in the farming community, but now they have the bit between their teeth.

This is assuming the Ethanol band wagon marches on and the alternatives don't get a consideration.

Then you'd better have "super" weather to ensure the "super" crop yields a "super" harvest, for if you take just one "super" out of the equation you can kiss your corporate asses goodbye, and your cars with it.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

To whom it may concern, I regret using the term "Cloud..........land" etc.

I admit to pulling a few coat tails and will desist in future.
Ian.

[dynosor]

Consider this for one moment, if ten million people world wide were to suddenly find themselves in danger of becoming inundated by rising waters,

Are we talking tsunamis or sea level variations due to polar ice melting? These have a slightly different time constant and not even the mighty Gore is suggesting that fossil fuel consumption causes earthquakes resulting in tsunamis. Actually, it might. On a very localized scale, coal mines sometimes collapse causing measurable tremors, but I digress.

If the sea level ever rose by the 6 inches, or feet or yards as they predict, it will take several human life times to do this. I think even a zombie can outpace this tidal wave and move to higher ground.

If the water rise due to GW is enough to cause flooding overnight, they can come stay at my house.

[dynosor]

with the Ethanol scenario being in vogue IE everybody wants a slice of the pie, and the bigger and fatter you can make the pie the more you're gonna get out of it.

While I can only speak for myself, I believe that only two types of people support using food to produce ethanol for fuel:
1) Those that swallow the idea that fossil fuel causes GW and therfore is "bad", and that any alternative is "good".
2) Those who stand to profit from growing food to produce fuel.

The people posting here that believe global warming is just as natural as global cooling and that there is little or nothing humans can do to help it along or prevent it, do NOT support this crime against humanity: artificially inducing starvation by making staple food scarce or expensive. I may be wrong about the extent this position is held - let anyone misrepresented by the above statement speak out and clarify their position.

[Mariss Freimanis]

Well folks, I sense a velvet fist coming down on this thread and I think it may be time for everyone to call it a day. All the people that had anything relevant to say have done so and patiently many times. There is really nothing left to add here anymore. What's left are the few ranting brutes when it's 2AM, the party is over and all the considerate guests have left and gone home. At this point I actually miss the erudite sophistication of XYZ when compared to her 'replacement'. I never knew nuts could be nuttier. Scary thought, isn't it?

Mariss