[ale] OT CFL cleanup / LED light bulbs starting to become affordable

Wed Jul 3 20:10:27 EDT 2013

No...No...No.  There you go again, writing email, doing "computing" things, watching tv, running an air conditioner, clothes dryer, light bulbs of all things, and even driving a car.  Bad human...bad.

Just kidding  8-)

I think we should all do what we can to conserve.  Regardless of motive, conservation will benefit the whole world.

The people who'll lose money if we implement all the measures the politically correct crowd think are necessary to solve this "problem" are us.  We'll pay ever higher costs for all of our energy and our merchandise because of all the artificial caps, taxes, tariffs, fees, and impediments to the people who make our economy run and make those things available to us.  Think $ 10 - $ 20 / gallon of gas, $ 1000 personal electric bills, and a 10 - 20% increase in the cost of every manufactured or transported good we buy, including food.  These numbers are made up, but representative of the concept.  This might be a good way to crash our entire economy and monetary system.  At this point, it won't need much help to crash.  Energy and transportation costs are already hurting many consumers severely and driving some companies out of business.  Then, when we cannot afford to drive, have power, or eat, we may be starving just like the people you mentioned, all because of artificial increases in cost of living and doing business.

Sincerely,

Ron

Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote:

>there is no debate. All that remains is ignorance and a huge dose of
>greed
>from those who will lose the most money if humans do what they must to
>keep
>a home that will support humans. Evolution is a slow process. Crop
>failure
>is fast. Starvation is a miserable way to go. Ask Africa.
>
>
>On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Ron Frazier (ALE) <
>atllinuxenthinfo at techstarship.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Ron Frazier (ALE) <
>> >atllinuxenthinfo at techstarship.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>  I've read scientific documents that indicate that global warming
>is
>> >> probably not caused fundamentally by humans.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I strongly doubt those "scientific reports" have been peer reviewed
>by
>> >actual scientists. The one scientist (out of several thousand in the
>> >field)
>> >that was bad-mouthing human-caused global warming was eventually
>paid
>> >by
>> >the Koch brothers to review the real scientific data that all the
>other
>> >scientists were getting, reviewing and analyzing. After more than a
>> >year of
>> >analysis even he admitted he was wrong and that humans are actively
>> >causing
>> >climate change due to CO2 emissions (overwhelmingly CO2 even as
>other
>> >gasses are for more problematic at heat trapping than CO2) and EVERY
>> >SINGLE
>> >ARGUMENT AGAINST IT WAS WRONG.
>> >
>> >Let me be clear on that last point. The only actual scientist to
>come
>> >forward and argue against global warming existing and being caused
>by
>> >humans finally sat down and did his job and evaluated the data,
>> >methodology
>> >and analysis techniques and concluded that the real scientists were
>all
>> >correct and correctly answered every, single complaint the
>denialists
>> >could
>> >muster.
>> >
>> >The Koch bros were furious and are now fighting the impending CO2
>> >emissions
>> >limitations on other fronts.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >--
>> >James P. Kinney III
>> >*
>> >*Every time you stop a school, you will have to build a jail. What
>you
>> >gain
>> >at one end you lose at the other. It's like feeding a dog on his own
>> >tail.
>> >It won't fatten the dog.
>> >- Speech 11/23/1900 Mark Twain
>> >*
>> >http://electjimkinney.org
>> >http://heretothereideas.blogspot.com/
>> >*
>>
>> This is now getting very off topic, but here goes.
>>
>> I'll preface this by saying this is not something I have the
>resources to
>> research and argue vigorously.  Nor would I want to get into a flame
>war
>> with anyone.  It obviously evokes strong emotions.  However, what I
>read
>> years ago, and I don't know where, exactly, was information that said
>there
>> were hundreds, if not thousands of scientists that had worked with
>the UN
>> on this research, and they had dissenting opinions, and that they
>were
>> censured because their opinion was not politically correct.  Thou
>shalt not
>> find any scientific evidence to contradict our preconceived opinion,
>and
>> thou shalt certainly not get published if you do.  The reason there's
>> little dissent in public reports, is that the organizing bodies
>refused to
>> allow the dissent.  If you count all the opinions, there is far from
>a
>> universal consensus.
>>
>> There is debate on whether the planet is even warming up on a long
>term
>> basis.  Even if it is, the magnitude of nature is far above the
>magnitude
>> of man's influence.  The most likely scenario is that forces we can
>neither
>> measure, control, or predict, like the sun's internal processes, or
>> climatological patterns, are causing warming.  The warming is causing
>> carbon dioxide to increase.  Not the other way around.  It's a
>question of
>> what is the cause and what is the effect.  Most likely, we have that
>> equation backwards.
>>
>> Even IF the planet is warming and even IF humans are having a
>material
>> affect on it and even IF there is a tipping point at which a series
>of
>> catastrophic things happen to our atmosphere,  all highly dubious, we
>as
>> humans, with our puny understanding of the systems, are incapable of
>> predicting that tipping point or knowing what will happen afterwards.
> They
>> cannot even get a 5 day forecast right, much less a 500 year one.
>>
>> I say again that I'm not the least bit concerned about my or my
>vendors'
>> carbon dioxide emissions, per se.  It is a vital and normal part of
>nature.
>>  Let's go back before man's influence.  What did you have?  You had a
>bunch
>> of plants that had absorbed CO2 and turned it into hydrocarbons in
>their
>> cells.  Dinosaurs and animals ate the plants and sometimes ate each
>other,
>> storing more and more hydrocarbons.  They died, got buried, and
>turned into
>> peat, coal, natural gas, and various types of petroleum.  When we
>burn it,
>> we're just releasing the CO2 that was there in the first place.
>>
>> I AM concerned about them dumping TCE in our rivers, about asbestos,
>about
>> wasting natural resources, about numerous other things coming from
>tail
>> pipes and smoke stacks and drain pipes that are harmful to our
>planet.  I
>> try to be as conservative as I practically can, but the key word is
>> practically.  I do not intend to ride a bicycle or a horse
>everywhere, nor
>> do I intend to live without electricity.
>>
>> These are my opinions.  I'll admit I could be wrong.  I'll also admit
>that
>> no one an prove it.  The science, such as it is, on this topic is
>> surrounded by political issues, money issues, hyperbole, and a
>million
>> different assumptions about history, climate, nature, cosmic weather,
>> meteorology, and other things that we cannot prove.  It's an
>intellectual
>> house of cards.  If you believe the Bible, the Earth is from 10,000 -
>> 100,000 years old.  If you believe evolution, it's millions to
>billions of
>> years old.  Regardless, our conclusions based on a puny 400 years or
>so of
>> actual records is virtually meaningless when compared to these time
>scales.
>>  Our overall understanding of these extraordinarily incredibly
>complex
>> multi variable system like our climate is correspondingly puny.  Any
>> assumptions based on extrapolations to times prior to our actual
>> observations are virtually worthless, as there are too many
>assumptions
>> which the assumptions are based on.
>>
>> Again, I would not want to fight over any of this, but those are my
>> thoughts.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Sent from my Android Acer A500 tablet with bluetooth keyboard and K-9
>Mail.
>> Please excuse my potential brevity if I'm typing on the touch screen.
>>
>> (PS - If you email me and don't get a quick response, you might want
>to
>> call on the phone.  I get about 300 emails per day from alternate
>energy
>> mailing lists and such.  I don't always see new email messages very
>> quickly.)
>>
>> Ron Frazier
>> 770-205-9422 (O)   Leave a message.
>> linuxdude AT techstarship.com
>> Litecoin: LZzAJu9rZEWzALxDhAHnWLRvybVAVgwTh3
>> Bitcoin: 15s3aLVsxm8EuQvT8gUDw3RWqvuY9hPGUU
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>-- 
>James P. Kinney III
>*
>*Every time you stop a school, you will have to build a jail. What you
>gain
>at one end you lose at the other. It's like feeding a dog on his own
>tail.
>It won't fatten the dog.
>- Speech 11/23/1900 Mark Twain
>*
>http://electjimkinney.org
>http://heretothereideas.blogspot.com/
>*
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ale mailing list
>Ale at ale.org
>http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo

--

Sent from my Android Acer A500 tablet with bluetooth keyboard and K-9 Mail.
Please excuse my potential brevity if I'm typing on the touch screen.

(PS - If you email me and don't get a quick response, you might want to
call on the phone.  I get about 300 emails per day from alternate energy
mailing lists and such.  I don't always see new email messages very quickly.)

Ron Frazier
770-205-9422 (O)   Leave a message.
linuxdude AT techstarship.com
Litecoin: LZzAJu9rZEWzALxDhAHnWLRvybVAVgwTh3
Bitcoin: 15s3aLVsxm8EuQvT8gUDw3RWqvuY9hPGUU