"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong - Page 55

02-09-2007, 11:32 AM

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 19:26:15 GMT, Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I give in to your logic that hilly terrain will use more gas, but that
>might (maybe) be a place where a gas--electric hybrid could save gas. If
>the down hill parts are steep enough to need the brakes then a hybrid
>could recharge on those parts. Those hills really do mess up the mileage.
>There probably won't be a car that can do it all in the near future.

A hybrid pretty much recharges off and on all the time in the real
world, in places where a gas only car is inefficient. If you turn on
the display, you start noticing all the times that your gas engine
works harder and when it is essentially coasting and charging the
battery. Even flat country is covered with small hills and
wind-protected stretches. I get recharge areas on U.S. 50 going into
Washington, DC that look flat.

Just like riding a bike - what the auto only crowd thinks is flat a
cyclist knows is actually a four mile uphill steep enough to take a
few mph off your speed and pretty much kill most coasting.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

02-09-2007, 11:34 AM

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

>schools...........
>I would say that is a problem with the county officials either
>completely blowing it, or getting their pockets lines to ignore the obvious.
>Bill Baka

Probably not, where there is an influx of residents,
all public services are short of money.

And in some towns, like mine, the school may
close because there are not enough students to make
the payroll, for 150 grade school students, laws require
a school superintendent with an advances degree,
a principle, and accredited teachers to qualify for
federal funds.

With high fuel costs, look for more people
moving south, or closer to work and schools and
shopping centers, or if oil stays above $60
a collapse of the world economy.

Garages and large commercial buildings
where there is not a lot of business are not heated
with modern heaters any more.

Sitting in an upholstered chair with a
propane radiant heater to warm the front feels
pretty good when it is 20 or 30 degrees below
normal.

Just some normal weather would be
nice.

Joe Fischer

02-09-2007, 11:38 AM

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 06:13:53 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>Its silly buying a car on the basis of such a rare event.

Perhaps, but bad knees aren't rare. Working a clutch is a problem for
many people, even those that know how to use a stick. FWIW, some
people said the same thing when they started to use synchros. (And
crash boxes can be done with a bad left knee.)

Today it takes a really good driver to outperform a good four or five
speed, and anyone sipping coffee between shifts isn't that person. It
takes a pretty good driver when you have paddle shifters.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

02-09-2007, 11:39 AM

The Real Bev <bashley101+[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> My grandkids live in an affluent (not rich, but containing mostly
> those monster tract homes that are going for $3/4 million now)
> district. They have "lockdown" drills. That's what's supposed to
> happen when a weapon or other threat is discovered. The kids drop
> flat on the floor and the staff turns out the lights. I need to find
> out more...

What you'll probably find is that it is yet another case of "scare the
kids to cover our asses." After the Columbine thing (also in an
affluent community), they are all scared that if they don't take every
precaution they can imagine, they might be sued for negligence.

If a meteor ever hits a school, you can bet that there'll be meteor
drills too.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

02-09-2007, 11:41 AM

On Feb 9, 3:22 pm, Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> At least I drive a small car and have no use for an SUV. There are a lot
> of 4 wheel drive cars that never even get near an off road experience.
> Bill Baka

Oh, everything is FAKE about them: their religiosity, their SUVs that
never see dirt, and their devotion to democracy.

The only thing real is that they LOVE WAR, and POLLUTE LIKE THERE'S NO
TOMORROW.

Oh, and they love Freedom Fries.

02-09-2007, 11:41 AM

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 06:13:53 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>> Plus, I managed to break an ankle in 1997 while at a big getaway
>> with about 50 people (I landed very awkwardly from my mountain
>> bike). Only one person out of those 50 could drive my car home.
>> My next car was automatic.
>
>Its silly buying a car on the basis of such a rare event.
>

Yes, true, but the example holds anyway. I've been known to lend my
car to family and friends. I really can't do that with a manual. On
the other hand, if we did outlaw automatics (and what true
conservative would allow such a governmental intrusion on the free
market), everyone would be able to drive it.

When I was a kid I worked as a delivery boy for a drug store (talk
about kids in a candy shop) and drove an old VB bug. You needed the
clutch to get into first, but from there on it was optional.

02-09-2007, 11:56 AM

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:55:47 -0800, The Real Bev
<bashley101+[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Bill Baka wrote:

>
>My grandkids live in an affluent (not rich, but containing mostly those
>monster tract homes that are going for $3/4 million now) district. They
>have "lockdown" drills. That's what's supposed to happen when a weapon
>or other threat is discovered. The kids drop flat on the floor and the
>staff turns out the lights. I need to find out more...

Unfortunately that would appear to be a smart thing to plan for
considering the number of actual incidents. Back when we were kids we
had those idiot abomb drills. Climb under the desk and put your head
between your legs. And, as the precocious kids added, kiss your ass
goodbye.

02-09-2007, 12:02 PM

On Feb 6, 8:00 pm, Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
> >> As far as available land, what kind of
> >> crop can you plant in the Himalayas? All that land going to waste.
>
> > You didn't answer my question. You predicted that 99.9% of the
> > world's food-producing capability was going to go away. I'm still
> > curious what your thought process was on that one. And I've been in
> > the Himalayas - they grow plenty (including poppies and pot).

>
> That wasn't a question that really deserved an answer. It should be
> obvious that more people will build more buildings and thus there will
> be less land available. The oceans are getting over fished so that
> resource will soon run out. Do you expect we will farm the moon or
> something?

I think they expect God to come from the skies with a cornucopia of
fruits and vegetables. Well, of course, he will come in an SUV (Hummer
most likely) killing pagans since there's no fruits and vegetables for
all. Cyclists though got no place in Heaven 'cause they voted for
Gore, who endorsed homosexuals, etc, etc.

02-09-2007, 12:11 PM

On Fri, "R.H. Allen" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I made a bit of an error there -- the heavier car would require 480kJ of
>extra energy compared to the lighter car, not 32kJ (assuming 600N and
>300N are required to keep the heavy and light cars, respectively, at
>constant speed). Assuming 30 mpg and 25% conversion efficiency, that's
>40MJ/mile for the light car and 41.92MJ/mile for the heavy one, so the
>added weight produces a 4.8% increase in fuel consumption. Considering
>that we're talking about a *doubling* in weight -- essentially a fully
>loaded one-ton pickup that itself only weighs a ton, or about a third of
>what such vehicles usually weigh -- that's still pretty small. A more
>realistic figure for such a vehicle would be more like 1.5% more
>gasoline (though of course the whole analysis is so simplified that the
>only real-world conclusion you can draw is that weight has a negligibly
>small effect).

That sounds -real world-, if it were much different
a train or even a big semi truck would not be able to
do what they do, some big trucks don't have engines
with much more displacement that a big car.

>I suspect something like rain-slickened roads or a difference in the
>direction of the wind are enough to cause more than a 0.1 mpg difference

Maybe much more, there was a true story in
Flying magazine about a guy trying to fly a Piper Cub
along the highway from the Salton Sea toward L.A.,
and was running low on gas, and tried to land, but
was flying backwards.
He ran out of gas and had to land backwards,
and when he jumped out, the plane flipped over
backwards.

I watched US Army spotter planes flying
backwards or holding stationary in north Texas
in 1946, and aircraft are probably better than
cars aerodynamically, so wind would seem to
make a difference.

Perhaps the moral of this story is that
automobile engines are greatly oversized so
those in a hurry can accelerate fast.

Joe Fischer

02-09-2007, 12:12 PM

On Feb 7, 1:29 am, Anthony Matonak
<anthony...@nothing.like.socal.rr.com> wrote:
> donquijote1954 wrote:
>
> ...> I think having them ride a bike, the vehicle Jesus would have ridden,
>
> ...
> By all reports, Jesus walked, went boating and (on special occasions)
> sat on a young ass.

Not only sat on it, but also spank it, or whip it, if you prefer.

But he would have ridden a bicycle whenever the donkey got tired --or
if there had been actual bike lanes. But, as you probably know, the
Romans didn't have a bicycle budget.