The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
How is everyone handling the heat these days? This is our 3rd heatwave this summer and hopefully the last. P.S.: Thanks to Global Warming / Climate Change, we will not survive as human beings if this get any
worse. You can bet on that one for sure. <shrug>
Well.... In my area this is just normal. I can remember years way hotter for longer periods of time. About the only difference is the drought and fires.
... I only touch base with reality on an as-needed basis!
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ -=The Wastelands BBS=- -=Since 1990=-
How is everyone handling the heat these days? This is our 3rd heatwave this summer and hopefully the last. P.S.: Thanks to Global Warming / Climate Change, we will not survive as human beings if this get any
worse. You can bet on that one for sure. <shrug>
$ The Millionaire $
I've been in Portland, OR for a couple years - having moved from Austin, TX... we have experienced a few record-breaking hot spells this summer... its 105 today.
While, coming from Texas, even these heatwaves seem mild - I have to remember that I'm in a completely different weather zone. And while I do hear and understand others who say 'this is normal, I've seen worse'... I think that we're well past the 'global warming isn't a thing' stages. Every single region is hotter than it was when we were kids - in a BIG way.
I agree that global warming is a [bad] thing, and that the world is changing... I don't think we're goners - but I do think we need to start addressing it with technology NOW.
Electric vehicles... go.
Green energy... go.
I'm sick and tired of the 'God's plan' and people unwilling to.... to look at NUMBERS and DATA that prove this fact.
We need to change this around, so that we don't do MORE damage to Earth.
|07p|15AULIE|1142|07o
|08.........
The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
How is everyone handling the heat these days? This is our 3rd
heatwave this summer and hopefully the last. P.S.: Thanks to
Global Warming / Climate Change, we will not survive as human
beings if this get any worse. You can bet on that one for sure.
<shrug>
The Millionaire wrote to paulie420 <=-
We need to change this around, so that we don't do MORE damage to Earth.
The Earth's core has already broken off.
So that shows how much irreparable damage we have caused.
I've been in Portland, OR for a couple years - having moved from Austin, TX... we have experienced a few record-breaking hot spells this summer... its 105 today.
I agree that global warming is a [bad] thing, and that the world is changing... I don't think we're goners - but I do think we need to start addressing it with technology NOW.
Electric vehicles... go.
Green energy... go.
I'm sick and tired of the 'God's plan' and people unwilling to.... to look at NUMBERS and DATA that prove this fact.
We need to change this around, so that we don't do MORE damage to Earth.
The Earth's core has already broken off. So that shows how much irreparable damage we have caused. Our icebergs in the Arctic are also
I'm wondering how fast we could change things. I'm not sure the technology is quite up there yet to fully replace fossil fuels. However, for cars at least, I'd think they could put in a system for quickly exchanging batteries and/or develop hydrogen fuel cell technology.
Nightfox wrote to The Millionaire <=-
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: The Millionaire to paulie420 on Thu Aug 12 2021 03:27 pm
The Earth's core has already broken off. So that shows how much irreparable damage we have caused. Our icebergs in the Arctic are also
Wait, what? How does a planet's core "break off"? Did Earth's core somehow get removed from the center of the earth? Is the earth now hollow?
Nightfox
DaiTengu wrote to Nightfox <=-
I'm wondering how fast we could change things. I'm not sure the technology is quite up there yet to fully replace fossil fuels. However, for cars at least, I'd think they could put in a system for quickly exchanging batteries and/or develop hydrogen fuel cell technology.
We have the technology and ability to build safe nuclear power
plants TODAY. The Oil and Gas industry has everyone convinced
that nuclear is "scary" when the truth is it's far safer to build
and operate than any other modern form of electrical generation.
We have the technology and ability to build safe nuclear power plants TODAY. The Oil and Gas industry has everyone convinced that nuclear is "scary" when the truth is it's far safer to build and operate than any other modern form of electrical generation.
DaiTengu
Nightfox wrote to The Millionaire <=-
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: The Millionaire to paulie420 on Thu Aug 12 2021 03:27 pm
The Earth's core has already broken off. So that shows how much irreparable damage we have caused. Our icebergs in the Arctic are also
Wait, what? How does a planet's core "break off"? Did Earth's core somehow get removed from the center of the earth? Is the earth now hollow?
Nightfox
I did just read they found a rock on Mars that is made up of the same materials as the Earths Core..... ;)
MRO wrote to Thumper <=-
I did just read they found a rock on Mars that is made up of the same materials as the Earths Core..... ;)
we dont even know what the fuck is in the earth's core. it could
be anything or nothing. we can't even drill that far down. the
deepest we have drilled is a bit over 40k feet.
we dont know if it's solid, or liquid or both. some people think
there's radioactive elements inside.
from a science standpoint we dont really know much about anything.
Wait, what? How does a planet's core "break off"? Did Earth's core somehow g
removed from the center of the earth? Is the earth now hollow?
And before you tree huggers chime in and tell how worried you are about
an accident, the odds of that happening are so close to ZERO that it's
not worth talking about. Yeah, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, I know. Things have come a long way since TMI, and Chernobyl was caused by
idiots and lax standards, in another country.
Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-
And before you tree huggers chime in and tell how worried you are about
an accident, the odds of that happening are so close to ZERO that it's
not worth talking about. Yeah, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, I know. Things have come a long way since TMI, and Chernobyl was caused by
idiots and lax standards, in another country.
And then there is Fukishima. The problem I have with them is
that they are almost always near water and, if there is an
accident, it is almost always a cluster.
For some reason, those who are in the US nuclear field appear to
be not that interested in these alternatives. Maybe it is not
only the gas, oil, and tree hugger interests that are pulling
strings.
Yes, that is indeed a strange thing. I don't see much pro-nuke "advertising" or promotional efforts, that's for sure.
We have the technology and ability to build safe nuclear power plants
TODAY. The Oil and Gas industry has everyone convinced that nuclear is
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
Me neither. I live on Long Island. They pulled the plug on a nuclear power plant halfway through construction because if a disaster happened it would be too difficult to get everyone off the Island safely. Nuclear power plants are not imune to natural disasters such as earthquakes ,hurricans, severe tornado's or tsunami's. How quickly we forget events like the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
yeah it is pretty safe. i worked in the oil and gas industry for 20 years. they arent scared of nuclear power. they are occupied with their cyclical existance of ups and downs that have existed since the industry began.
I had an inside perspective and first hand knowledge of how an entire year would go for our industry and others. they were alway right. not once did I hear them talk about nuclear power.
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
Absolutely right. One thing you left out is that it is also FAR more green/clean. Barring an accident, the only emission is.... water vapor from the cooling towers.
And before you tree huggers chime in and tell how worried you are about an accident, the odds of that happening are so close to ZERO that it's not worth talking about. Yeah, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, I know. Things have come a long way since TMI, and Chernobyl was caused by
idiots and lax standards, in another country.
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.Me neither. I live on Long Island. They pulled the plug on a nuclear power plant halfway through construction because if a disaster happened it would be too difficult to get everyone off the Island safely. Nuclear power plants are not imune to natural disasters such as earthquakes ,hurricans, severe tornado's or tsunami's. How quickly we forget events like the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
What I wouldn't want to live next to is a coal, oil, or gas plant. I'd be fine living next to a nuclear power plant, all it emits is steam.
DaiTengu
Nuclear power plants are not imune to natural disasters such as earthquakes ,hurricans, severe tornado's or tsunami's. How quickly we forget events like the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
Yeah I know, all the hundreds and thousands of people that died from the Fukushima disas-- oh wait. no one died.
DaiTengu
DaiTengu wrote to Gamgee <=-
Absolutely right. One thing you left out is that it is also FAR more green/clean. Barring an accident, the only emission is.... water vapor from the cooling towers.
That's my point. Even solar and wind kill more people than
nuclear.
And before you tree huggers chime in and tell how worried you are about
an accident, the odds of that happening are so close to ZERO that it's
not worth talking about. Yeah, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, I know. Things have come a long way since TMI, and Chernobyl was caused by
idiots and lax standards, in another country.
I am a tree hugger. us reasonable tree huggers are quite aware
of how safe nuclear is.
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than shrinking.
Ksource wrote to Gamgee <=-
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than shrinking.
Ehh I don't know about that. IMHO the future of nuclear is not
all that bright. We've only got about 7 million tonnes of Uranium
left to be mined, which at current usage will last about 100
years. If you start expanding nuclear like crazy and increasing
demand, what are you going to do when uranium gets really scarce
in 50 years?
Nuclear seems fine as a stop-gap measure to me, until we
transition over to something that's really sustainable, but it
looks like it's got a pretty short life.
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than
shrinking.
Ehh I don't know about that. IMHO the future of nuclear is not all that bright. We've only got about 7 million tonnes of Uranium left to be mined, which at current usage will last about 100 years. If you start expanding nuclear like crazy and increasing demand, what are you going to do when uranium gets really scarce in 50 years?
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than
shrinking.
Ehh I don't know about that. IMHO the future of nuclear is not all that bright. We've only got about 7 million tonnes of Uranium left to be mined, which at current usage will last about 100 years. If you start expanding nuclear like crazy and increasing demand, what are you going to do when uranium gets really scarce in 50 years?
Quoting Paulie420 to The Millionaire <=-
I'm sick and tired of the 'God's plan' and people unwilling to.... to
look at NUMBERS and DATA that prove this fact.
We need to change this around, so that we don't do MORE damage to
Earth.
So, where are these numbers? Have you reviewed them? I just wonder if
the climate change we are experiencing is just part of the earths long, long, long, long term weather cycle. What I don't understand is how the scientists can be so sure that this warming is *entirely* or even *largely* caused by humans. I'm being sincere here, I have not seen the numbers and maybe that is the problem. 1) I'm not interested enough to seek them out and/or 2) they need to be placed more in our face instead
of just mentioned in "news" articles without any bibliographic
references.
Gamgee wrote to Ksource <=-
Ksource wrote to Gamgee <=-
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than shrinking.
Ehh I don't know about that. IMHO the future of nuclear is not
all that bright. We've only got about 7 million tonnes of Uranium
left to be mined, which at current usage will last about 100
years. If you start expanding nuclear like crazy and increasing
demand, what are you going to do when uranium gets really scarce
in 50 years?
This article below says we've got 230 years of it left: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-global-uranium- deposits-last/
Quoting Elf to Paulie420 <=-
So, where are these numbers? Have you reviewed them? I just wonder if
the climate change we are experiencing is just part of the earths
long, long, long, long term weather cycle.
What I don't understand is
how the scientists can be so sure that this warming is *entirely* or
even *largely* caused by humans.
Is there one site for this where we can get all the scientific facts -
and let's keep in mind, "scientific facts" are defined as "our current scientific undertanding" and dependant on our *correct* interpretation
of those facts.
Atroxi wrote to Gamgee <=-
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than shrinking.
Ehh I don't know about that. IMHO the future of nuclear is not
all that bright. We've only got about 7 million tonnes of Uranium
left to be mined, which at current usage will last about 100
years. If you start expanding nuclear like crazy and increasing
demand, what are you going to do when uranium gets really scarce
in 50 years?
This article below says we've got 230 years of it left: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-global-uranium- deposits-last/
Sorry for butting in, but I just wanted to say that it just
occurred to me that I never really thought about the amount of
uranium still left to be mined. Now that I know, I never expected
it to be `that few'?
It's a quite mind-boggling few minutes for me.
Quoting Paulie420 to Elf <=-
Its SO much different in EVERY region than when we were 20. California burns for 6 months a year - hell, even Oregon burns 50% more than a
decade ago.
Wheres the numbers? Pull up weather.com. Type in 1979 and 2021. Theres
the numbers.
Its so in black and white that.... theres the numbers.
Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-
And before you tree huggers chime in and tell how worried you are about an accident, the odds of that happening are so close to ZERO that it's not worth talking about. Yeah, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, I know. Things have come a long way since TMI, and Chernobyl was caused by
idiots and lax standards, in another country.
And then there is Fukishima. The problem I have with them is
that they are almost always near water and, if there is an
accident, it is almost always a cluster.
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than shrinking.
<SNIP>
For some reason, those who are in the US nuclear field appear to
be not that interested in these alternatives. Maybe it is not
only the gas, oil, and tree hugger interests that are pulling
strings.
Yes, that is indeed a strange thing. I don't see much pro-nuke "advertising" or promotional efforts, that's for sure.
... All the easy problems have been solved.
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: HusTler to MRO on Sun Aug 15 2021 08:30 am
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
Me neither. I live on Long Island. They pulled the plug on a nuclear pow plant halfway through construction because if a disaster happened it woul be too difficult to get everyone off the Island safely. Nuclear power pla are not imune to natural disasters such as earthquakes ,hurricans, severe tornado's or tsunami's. How quickly we forget events like the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
yeah, it just takes one time.
i heard that they are constantly painting in nuclear plants. it's to hold ba
anyways, it is safe stuff. and you can recycle a lot of the by products.
i just wouldnt want to live near one or work in one and that just says a lot
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: MRO to DaiTengu on Sat Aug 14 2021 01:27 am
yeah it is pretty safe. i worked in the oil and gas industry for 20 yea they arent scared of nuclear power. they are occupied with their cyclic existance of ups and downs that have existed since the industry began. I had an inside perspective and first hand knowledge of how an entire y would go for our industry and others. they were alway right. not once d I hear them talk about nuclear power.
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
What I wouldn't want to live next to is a coal, oil, or gas plant. I'd be f
DaiTengu
... QWK? I don't need no stinkin' QWK packet!
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: Ksource to Gamgee on Mon Aug 16 2021 01:30 am
Ahhh, yes, forgot about that one. Agreed. I still think nuclear is a
valid option for power generation that should be expanding rather than
shrinking.
Ehh I don't know about that. IMHO the future of nuclear is not all that bright. We've only got about 7 million tonnes of Uranium left to be min which at current usage will last about 100 years. If you start expandin nuclear like crazy and increasing demand, what are you going to do when uranium gets really scarce in 50 years?
How using Plutonium or other known elements? I'm sure science could figure o
... To think too long about doing a thing often becomes its undoing.
Nuclear plant senior leaders are all former Navy. They love the smell of fresh paint, and are real anal about chips and scuffs on walls and doorways. It's more about appearance than any form of protection.
Those are just weather reports and I get that. But those weather reports do not tell us that WE CAUSED the rise in temperatures. They just show
the temperatures going up. That does not mean man caused it. How do we know this is not a part of earth's normal cycle? How do we know we got
the science right? Where are the numbers PROVING that we caused the rise in temperature? I guess that is what I question. I *AM NOT* saying
climate change/global warming is not real. I am just questioning how we know that man caused it and that it would not have happened as part of a longer cycle of earth's history. And is our understanding of earth's
past weather patterns BEFORE we started recording them accurate? Again,
I am not saying "it's not real" I'm just trying to understand how we can know for sure that we caused the warming.
Well... I am not a scientist so I won't fake the funk and act like I KNOW that
E caused all/part/most/some/blah of global warming, but... the globe... is and
as been warming... at much crazier rates than previously.
What changed? Oh.... cars, pollution, expansion, US. :P
DUMAS WALKER wrote to PAULIE420 <=-
Sometime in the past year, there was a very interesting show on PBS,
maybe an episode of NOVA, where a "science guy" talked to a bunch of
other scientists about global weather. They traveled to a lot of interesting places, including a place that is currently tundra but that contains very strong evidence of once being a lush tropical forest...
not when the continents were in a different place, but actually at the latitude it is at now.
Quoting Paulie420 to Elf <=-
Well... I am not a scientist so I won't fake the funk and act like I
KNOW that WE caused all/part/most/some/blah of global warming, but...
the globe... is and has been warming... at much crazier rates than previously.
What changed? Oh.... cars, pollution, expansion, US. :P
So while I'm just an amateur that DOESN'T know; I'd say WE are the
cause and that changes to attempt to slow down global warming as much
as possible are warranted, needed and...
VERY cool! Wouldn't mind seeing that!
I know rivers change as well. Now it's 'controlled,' but didn't use to
be. I wonder if things wouldn't be 'better' globally if we didn't try
and CONTROL nature as much...
DUMAS WALKER wrote to JIMMY ANDERSON <=-
@VIA: CAPCITY2
@MSGID: <612684D9.55708.dove-gen@capitolcityonline.net>
@REPLY: <61254C5C.120246.dove-gen@vert.synchro.net>
VERY cool! Wouldn't mind seeing that!
I thought it was.
I know rivers change as well. Now it's 'controlled,' but didn't use to
be. I wonder if things wouldn't be 'better' globally if we didn't try
and CONTROL nature as much...
When I was in high school, our Biology teacher was telling us about how the US Army Corps of Engineers had been tasked with straightening out
the Mississippi River in order to make it easier to navigate. So, they short-cutted a bunch of bends in the river. This had the unintended result of also making the water flow faster as it flows towards the
Gulf of Mexico.
That has caused more fresh water to enter the Gulf, at a faster rate
than the Gulf can "assimilate," and also anything that has run-off into the river is more likely to make it all the way to the Gulf before it
is absorbed by the river bed, or caught in one of the bends. That is
why there is a muddy, mostly "dead zone" that is growing in the Gulf
where the Mississippi drains into it.
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
What I wouldn't want to live next to is a coal, oil, or gas plant.
I used to work at a nuclear power plant and lived within the 10 mile evacuatio n zone. Any work done in the protected area has safety precautions and checkpoints built in, and the operators are disciplined and very meticulous re garding their work.
Sorry for butting in, but I just wanted to say that it just occurred to me that I never really thought about the amount of uranium still left to be mined. Now that I know, I never expected it to be `that few'?
It's a quite mind-boggling few minutes for me.
This is kinda related... Not that loss of property or loss of life is not
bad - it is - but every time I hear about a tornado doing damage, it's
always to the things that man built and I think about that if that house wasn't there to begin with, then there's be no damage.
I don't mean that cruel, just looking at the evnironmental picture.
Rivers flood, change course, etc. Forests burn. It's the way God made
nature to work, and man is interfering with it.
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: Moondog to DaiTengu on Sun Aug 22 2021 12:03 pm
regular people do not want to be near a nuclear power plant.
i wouldn't want to live next to one.
What I wouldn't want to live next to is a coal, oil, or gas plant.
I used to work at a nuclear power plant and lived within the 10 mile evacuatio n zone. Any work done in the protected area has safety precautions and checkpoints built in, and the operators are disciplined and very meticulous re garding their work.
Yep, that's why I said I'd be perfectly fine living next to a nuclear power
DaiTengu
... A oscillator will oscillate at the wrong frequency ...if it oscillates.
Sometime in the past year, there was a very interesting show on PBS, maybe an episode of NOVA, where a "science guy" talked to a bunch of other
Sometime in the past year, there was a very interesting show on PBS, maybe >DW> an episode of NOVA, where a "science guy" talked to a bunch of other
I saw that show. Very interesting. I ask myself why some scientists tell us we >are all doomed if we don't do something NOW, and others tell us earth goes thru
changes and it's just the way it is. I'm convinced it has to so with money. The
e scientist's need funding and will say whatever their donors want to hear.
Re: Re: Heatwave
By: Dumas Walker to PAULIE420 on Mon Aug 23 2021 05:02 pm
Sometime in the past year, there was a very interesting show on PBS, ma an episode of NOVA, where a "science guy" talked to a bunch of other
I saw that show. Very interesting. I ask myself why some scientists tell us need funding and will say whatever their donors want to hear.
|07 HusTler
Havens BBS
havens.synchro.net
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 257 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 59:50:24 |
| Calls: | 1,792 |
| Files: | 4,168 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (1,004K bytes) |
| Messages: | 395,167 |