"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong - Page 22

02-04-2007, 08:53 PM

donquijote1954 wrote:
> On Feb 3, 6:46 pm, "[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
> wrote:
>
>> Reading the thread I have to laugh it's funny how cyclist of all
>> abilities and location on Earth are generally thinking the same. Here
>> is my take on the financial side of this war and global warming.
>> First lets take the billions of dollars invested in this war and buy
>> these people bikes. A) It will help reduce stress and then maybe they
>> can look at this dispute in a new light. B) By taking the money we
>> are spending on this war we could supply people all over the world
>> with nonpolluting means of transportation that would lower carbon
>> dioxide levels around the world. Okay so this is a thought of
>> eutopia. However, if you can't dream it you can't be it. At over 1
>> million dollars a day earning for exon I wonder what there take is on
>> this idea. A famous quote goes "I wait for the day when government
>> has to have a bake sale to build a bomb, and schools have money to
>> educate their children properly" or something like that.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Yep, but the hungry lions make history, and they can't bet on vehicles
> that feed them with "peanuts" --the bike. They want juicy steak...
>
> 'Yes, we need to fight a war, but no, the enemy is not Iraq... The
> enemy is oil with 65+ percent of the known oil reserves in the
> politically unstable, "Death to America"-chanting Middel East. Imagine
> the advances the United States could make to world stability and
> developing domestic employment opportunities if it spent the $79+
> billion Congress recently approved for Bush's Iraq war on alternative
> energy subsidies and investment. Might this be a better way to fight
> terrorism, support our troops, and regain world favor?'
> -Jay Lustgarten (Source: World Press Review, letters). See this
> solution... [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>
>
$79 billion is nothing compared to the total cost so far. It is more
like half a trillion. A trillion. Try to even count that high. Bush must
be counting on the average person not being able to understand how MUCH
that is.
Bill Baka

02-04-2007, 08:53 PM

donquijote1954 wrote:
> On Feb 3, 6:46 pm, "[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
> wrote:
>
>> Reading the thread I have to laugh it's funny how cyclist of all
>> abilities and location on Earth are generally thinking the same. Here
>> is my take on the financial side of this war and global warming.
>> First lets take the billions of dollars invested in this war and buy
>> these people bikes. A) It will help reduce stress and then maybe they
>> can look at this dispute in a new light. B) By taking the money we
>> are spending on this war we could supply people all over the world
>> with nonpolluting means of transportation that would lower carbon
>> dioxide levels around the world. Okay so this is a thought of
>> eutopia. However, if you can't dream it you can't be it. At over 1
>> million dollars a day earning for exon I wonder what there take is on
>> this idea. A famous quote goes "I wait for the day when government
>> has to have a bake sale to build a bomb, and schools have money to
>> educate their children properly" or something like that.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Yep, but the hungry lions make history, and they can't bet on vehicles
> that feed them with "peanuts" --the bike. They want juicy steak...
>
> 'Yes, we need to fight a war, but no, the enemy is not Iraq... The
> enemy is oil with 65+ percent of the known oil reserves in the
> politically unstable, "Death to America"-chanting Middel East. Imagine
> the advances the United States could make to world stability and
> developing domestic employment opportunities if it spent the $79+
> billion Congress recently approved for Bush's Iraq war on alternative
> energy subsidies and investment. Might this be a better way to fight
> terrorism, support our troops, and regain world favor?'
> -Jay Lustgarten (Source: World Press Review, letters). See this
> solution... [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>
>
$79 billion is nothing compared to the total cost so far. It is more
like half a trillion. A trillion. Try to even count that high. Bush must
be counting on the average person not being able to understand how MUCH
that is.
Bill Baka

02-04-2007, 08:58 PM

donquijote1954 wrote:
> On Feb 3, 9:29 pm, Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> point is, "What ever happened to little economy cars??".
>> Bill Baka- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> Europe is full of them. They are too Smart for us...
>
> Mercedes Smart Car Headed for U.S. Market
>
> June 26, 2006
> DaimlerChrysler plans to sell its 60-mile-per-gallon two-seater Smart
> Car in the U.S. next year.
>
> The little Smart Car is just more than 8 feet long and less than 5
> feet wide and is small enough to fit in half of a typical parking
> space.
>
> The three-cylinder turbocharged Smart Car can achieve up to 60 mpg,
> according to DaimlerChrysler.
>
>
> .
>
I used to drive nothing but Renault R-8's and R-10's and one of those
got a staggering 54 MPG, in the 60's and 70's. It can be done, so why
are all the car ads bragging about 28 MPG? Does nobody feel like their
intelligence is under rated by the marketing guys?
Even an American tank can get over 30 MPG if it is gear right.
My 1988 Mustang 5.0 got 33 MPG in cruise mode, due to the extra high
gearing I had.
I really feel insulted by some of the ads on television.
Bill Baka

02-04-2007, 08:58 PM

donquijote1954 wrote:
> On Feb 3, 9:29 pm, Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> point is, "What ever happened to little economy cars??".
>> Bill Baka- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> Europe is full of them. They are too Smart for us...
>
> Mercedes Smart Car Headed for U.S. Market
>
> June 26, 2006
> DaimlerChrysler plans to sell its 60-mile-per-gallon two-seater Smart
> Car in the U.S. next year.
>
> The little Smart Car is just more than 8 feet long and less than 5
> feet wide and is small enough to fit in half of a typical parking
> space.
>
> The three-cylinder turbocharged Smart Car can achieve up to 60 mpg,
> according to DaimlerChrysler.
>
>
> .
>
I used to drive nothing but Renault R-8's and R-10's and one of those
got a staggering 54 MPG, in the 60's and 70's. It can be done, so why
are all the car ads bragging about 28 MPG? Does nobody feel like their
intelligence is under rated by the marketing guys?
Even an American tank can get over 30 MPG if it is gear right.
My 1988 Mustang 5.0 got 33 MPG in cruise mode, due to the extra high
gearing I had.
I really feel insulted by some of the ads on television.
Bill Baka

02-04-2007, 09:04 PM

The Real Bev wrote:
> William Souden wrote:
>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>> Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
>>>>> In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] says...
>>>>>> And they are banned on any sensibly organised freeway etc.
>>>>> Which makes the half of the U.S. that allows bicycles on Interstates
>>>>> less than sensible, even though the accident rate is neglible?
>>>> Interstates aint freeways.
>>> They are in the USA.
>>
>> So how will welfare boy reply to this obvious fact? The paper bag bot?
>> The flushing bot? My guess is "bull****", his standard auto response
>> when the facts fail him.
>
> Come, come, now. You're confusing his insularity with his reflex answers.
>
> I really have to wonder why he bothers you so much. Surely your
> newsreader has killfile capability. Even thunderbird, which allows you
> to kill by sender, subject or date, should be sufficient to make him
> disappear from your world forever.
>
If you are looking to build a kill file Thunder bird has a few flaws.
You will still get the replies from other people.
That's life.
Bill Baka

02-04-2007, 09:04 PM

The Real Bev wrote:
> William Souden wrote:
>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>> Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
>>>>> In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] says...
>>>>>> And they are banned on any sensibly organised freeway etc.
>>>>> Which makes the half of the U.S. that allows bicycles on Interstates
>>>>> less than sensible, even though the accident rate is neglible?
>>>> Interstates aint freeways.
>>> They are in the USA.
>>
>> So how will welfare boy reply to this obvious fact? The paper bag bot?
>> The flushing bot? My guess is "bull****", his standard auto response
>> when the facts fail him.
>
> Come, come, now. You're confusing his insularity with his reflex answers.
>
> I really have to wonder why he bothers you so much. Surely your
> newsreader has killfile capability. Even thunderbird, which allows you
> to kill by sender, subject or date, should be sufficient to make him
> disappear from your world forever.
>
If you are looking to build a kill file Thunder bird has a few flaws.
You will still get the replies from other people.
That's life.
Bill Baka

02-04-2007, 09:14 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Don Klipstein) writes:

> In article <45c68052$0$16912$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, Wayne Pein wrote:
>>The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think that's true. To accommodate more and more traffic, a
>>> number of roads have been widened just enough to provide two lanes of
>>> traffic each way with NO additional space between the cars and the curb.
>>> No matter how friendly a driver might be, there isn't enough space to
>>> pass a bicyclist without moving into the next lane, which is probably
>>> already occupied by a car. This is dangerous for everybody, and most
>>> bicyclists stay off such roads.
>>>
>>It's interesting how motorists incriminate themselves by claiming that
>>slow traffic, and specifically bicycle traffic, causes the danger. As a
>>motorist, I don't have a problem with slow traffic such as bicycles,
>>front loaders, stopped busses, cars and delivery vehicles. I think
>>incompetent motorists should just not drive.
>
> What percentage of motorists do you expect to keep their cool when they
> have to slow down a lot for a cyclist, only to see the cyclist keep moving
> towards beside the vehicle at the head of the line when the motor vehicles
> stop and line up for a red light?

How can the cyclists do that if there is no room for a cyclist
and a car within a single lane? That is the situation under
discussion, as I read it.
--
Ben Pfaff
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-04-2007, 09:14 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Don Klipstein) writes:

> In article <45c68052$0$16912$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, Wayne Pein wrote:
>>The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think that's true. To accommodate more and more traffic, a
>>> number of roads have been widened just enough to provide two lanes of
>>> traffic each way with NO additional space between the cars and the curb.
>>> No matter how friendly a driver might be, there isn't enough space to
>>> pass a bicyclist without moving into the next lane, which is probably
>>> already occupied by a car. This is dangerous for everybody, and most
>>> bicyclists stay off such roads.
>>>
>>It's interesting how motorists incriminate themselves by claiming that
>>slow traffic, and specifically bicycle traffic, causes the danger. As a
>>motorist, I don't have a problem with slow traffic such as bicycles,
>>front loaders, stopped busses, cars and delivery vehicles. I think
>>incompetent motorists should just not drive.
>
> What percentage of motorists do you expect to keep their cool when they
> have to slow down a lot for a cyclist, only to see the cyclist keep moving
> towards beside the vehicle at the head of the line when the motor vehicles
> stop and line up for a red light?

How can the cyclists do that if there is no room for a cyclist
and a car within a single lane? That is the situation under
discussion, as I read it.
--
Ben Pfaff
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-05-2007, 03:27 AM

"Bill Baka" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:VHzxh.71362>>
> My 1988 Mustang 5.0 got 33 MPG in cruise mode, due to the extra high
> gearing I had.
..
> Bill Baka

Bull****!

02-05-2007, 03:29 AM

Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mark Hickey wrote:
>> Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>> Religious people are hopeless.
>>
>> Yeah, just look at the poor owner and coach of the Colts. A couple
>> real failures, those two.
>
>What. Only one example. That makes my case.

Look up the word "topical", Bill...

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Home of the $795 ti frame