I call b.s. plenty of old tube radios that are 50+ years old work fine including capacitors. I suspect even the batteries are going to be the biggest problem and they might even last vacuum packed. Right now as we speak I am listening to 36 year old Advent speakers picked up off Craig's list that were haphazardly stored in someone's damp basement that have capacitors in the crossover network between the woofer and tweeter, and they sound just as good as any audiophile under 1000 dollar speaker.
I am down with everything you wrote (yes including the 2nd amendment defense) expect lumping in global warming as a non problem. Engaging in global warming denial does nothing to help your case. This is what the peer reviewed journal Science has to say about models predicting anthropogenic climate change:
"IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].
Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).
The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9)."
The deniers meanwhile all end being dunded by fossil fuel industry sources:
A study published in the journal Environmental Politics finds that 92 per cent of 141 English-language environmentally âoeskepticalâ books, most published since 1992, are linked to conservative âoethink tanks.â The authors conclude that the environmental skepticism of such organizations âoeis a tactic of an elite-driven counter-movement designed to combat environmentalism, and that the successful use of this tactic has contributed to the weakening of US commitment to environmental protection.â
I have lived in rural northern Michigan and rural Oregon and I have no problem with rural people having trucks (though preferably biodiesel) pickups if they have real hauling to do. But how many SUVs are really sold for that purpose? I'd estimate 5% or less. The rest of them are the leather seat and 8 speaker sound system models (now with more cup holders) sold to yuppie males who THINK they have extremely small penises and are overcompensating with a vehicle. These dimwits will doom us all.:(
p.s I notice you cherry picked the one of two factors out of dozens listed that was trending in a positive direction, nice. To everyone else with a more open mind I suggest reading the WP article to see what its overall conclusions actually are.
"And honestly...when this hits in 2100....I'm very likely NOT to be alive then...so, it isn't like this will affect me."
After you the deluge, eh? Of course conservatives aren't evil mean spirited SOBs who don't care what kind of planet they leave for future generations, how could I ever think that?
If if the result of the aggregate of our individual decisions is ecological disaster what then? Was it really worth it so some smug self centered yuppie could park their Lincoln Navigator next to the Hosta moncrop lining the driveway of their mini-mansion?
No! Look at Craig's list used cars for example, you can pick up 15 to 20 year old Japanese cars all day long for between 500 to 2000 dollars, and American cars that old, not so much? Why? They went to the crusher already, and I am talking in south east Michigan right in the midst of American auto plants so there were MANY more American cars to start out with.
A heavier car also has more inertia thus it take more energy and more vibration more to start and stop producing more wear. And the more weight you add to compensate for the poor wear performance by beefing the car up even more the worse gas mileage the car gets exacerbating the problem of inefficient poor handling American cars very few people need for the hauling capability even more.
Again read the Malcom Gladwell article it's because SUVs WERE tremendously profitable to make compared to cars. They figured unfortunately correctly that they could SUVs to cubicle drones with poor male self image problems who substituted having a big macho vehicle for having a life. Unfortunately this strategy worked for about 15 years and now the big 3 management is stuck with manufacturing and distribution facilities here geared up to make vehicles no one wants anymore. The big 3 are such big titanic like boats that it will take them a long time (years?) to retool their factories and rethink their marketing strategies. As a Michigan resident I think they should be given the chance to do that, and the blame for the big 3s current failure should be placed squarely where it belongs, management.
And my 19 year old Toyota Corolla has 254,000 miles on it and gets 30 mpg. And guess what BOTH of these examples are anecdotal evidence, I highly doubt on average most American V8s make it to 200,000 miles where many Japanese 4 bangers do.
Except the SUV isn't safer if it flips over when driving a tippy vehicle like a dumbass. I see flipped over SUVs all the time oo 1-94 outside of Detroit. The only good thing about this is at least natural selection over time will weed SUV driving dumbasses out of the population.
"Ethics are different for everyone one," eh? So you don't mind if I kick your door down and shoot you and your family with a pump shotgun if that is MY interpretation of what an ethical action is? When someone has a BFG suddenly postmodern ethical relativism isn't so appealing is it? That my friend is why the only relativists you find are in sophomore college philosophy class rooms, in the real world people know that ethics are the ONLY thing holding us back from man on man fight to the finish barbarism.
(safety statistics compiled by Tom Wenzel, a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, in California, and Marc Ross, a physicist at the University of Michigan. ) See article linked above for a better formated table of this data.
Malcolm Gladwell the author of the article:
"Honors
In 2005, Time named Malcolm Gladwell one of its 100 most influential people. He is the author of three New York Times #1 best sellers.[12] In 2007, he received the American Sociological Associationâ(TM)s first Award for Excellence in the Reporting of Social Issues.[13] Also in 2007, Gladwell received an honorary Doctor of Letters degree from the University of Waterloo.[14][15] [edit]Works"
And you? Just some jerk who is defensive about his love of big wasteful cars. Like I said my well documented data from Gladwell's article v.s. more scattered anecdotes. The ball sir is in your court.
Everyone THINKS they are an above average driver but only empirical data tells you what cars are actually safer given a normal distribution of drivers, driving them. Data trumps personal anecdotes of people who self evaluate, get it? Read the Gladwell article which has those statistics and get back to me, m'K?
More people need to hear this message in the U.S. We are soooo far behind Europe and Asia in transportation habit it's not funny. I blame the big 3 relentlessly advertising their WWII truck platforms on tee vee (now with new improved CUPHOLDERS) for a quick easy ethics free buck.
"It's just that I also happen to see trucks as being much better built and ultimately safer to drive."
Except in the rational world of facts you'd be wrong, people drive SUVs too fast in wet and icy conditions leading to these top top heavy vehicles rollin over or not stopping in time. SUVs also suck at accident avoidance which is half the battle due to inertia and poor steering compared to smaller more precise cars. For empirical substation of this see Malcom Gladwell's excellent article on SUVs:
And as for better built I'd say the average American V8 is very, very lucky to make it to 175,000 miles where as OHC Japanese 4 bangers OFTEN make it to 250,000 and Mercedes diesels and Volvos to 350,000. A heavier car wears out faster due to simply physics even if built to the same build quality standards which American trucks aren't.
In the long run I hope we do have the social will to switch our auto plants here in the U.S. to making hybrids, small diesels, trains, buses, and windmill parts but I am NOT holding my breath.:(
Comparing the luxury of talking on a cell phone while driving to the necessity for many of driving to the store is amazing, I dub thee Sir. Douchebag the 1st douchiest of all douchebags for the entire millennium, Congratulations!!!!!!!
Driving is unfortunately been made very necessary in our society do to for example stores being long distances from houses to food stores, etc. Talking on a cell phone while driving OTH is a non necessity 99% of cell phone talk is gossiphy blather or banal requests to pick up crackers on the way home from work. I don't have a cell phone because even when people aren't driving I think it's rude for example to talk on a cell phone when you are physically with another person.
And I am hardly a luddite I have 2 dual processor Macs the MacBook which runs XP and Ubuntu under VMs and a separates based stereo system. I do however loath cell phones and if I could hit a button to make them all disappear I would do so without even an instants hesitation and as an added bonus probably save hundreds of peoples lives a year. My guess is far more people die from stupid driving mistakes made while using cell phones than are saved during emergencies despite the fact that "emergency" is often the rational people fall back on justify their little "hit me back yo" gossip box.
The fact you can even compare the trivial luxury of gossiping on a cell phone while driving with the utter necessity for survival of growing food shows what a dingle berry chewing deep tonguing butt sucker you are. And that's actually even an insult to innocent gay people that enjoy rim jobs for you are far worse than that!
This is total crap talking on a cell phone while driving is a total non necessity and what's more people KNOW it's a non necessity and do it anyways out of purely self centered spite, that IMO is EVIL and I won hesitate to call people out on it.
Your bottom line is your saving two minutes getting to work or blathering meaningless trivialities on a cell phone is more important to you than saving someone's life which is sociopathic and quite literally EVIL IMO. You want to know why some people HATE Americans you are looking at it in the response above, it's the careless, self centered, sociopathic, evil, greed stupid!
Exactly that's why I call them weak minded conformists, they make stupid decisions due to social pressure induced by television advertising. i sincerely hope gas goes back to 4/gallon as the only thing that will influence these heard animal sheeple is the t.v. news telling them a small car is "cool" due to high gas prices, sigh.
It reminds me of that Colbert Report where he drives the Hummer stretch Limo from gas station to gas station, I'm sure that car has an aggressive evil Nazi like "face" that appeals to Americans that put brawn before brains too.
Now I see why you are my foe on slashodot, all it takes in ONE child to run out in the street of all the millions of children in the U.S. while some worthless douchebag piece of human garbage like yourself talks on the cell phone while driving 10 mph over the speed limit for a tragedy to happen that will scar the families life FOREVER.
In sum FUCK YOU you are a subhuman, sociopathic,EVIL, soulless worthless, deep tonguing ass sucker Cayenne8!!!! You aren't a cute troll you are a worthless waste of the planets precious oxygen for advocating reckless driving.
It's all good until a little kid runs out in front of your car SUDDENLY, right selfish yuppie cell pone talking drivers? Because we all know your S.O. telling you to pick up a quart of milk on the way home from work is way more important than some innocent child's life, right? I am sooooo sick of people who rationalize talking on a cell phone while driving, DON'T period, end of story. Is this advice saves one childs life, or even a dog or cats life then yes it WAS worth getting all in your face about it! No your trivial blather is NOT worth the life of anyone or another living creature get over your self centered self already!
...equals socialized risk and private profits which is frighteningly close to Mussolini's idea of a the quite literally fascist economic structure of corporatism.
Slashdot Mirror
I call b.s. plenty of old tube radios that are 50+ years old work fine including capacitors. I suspect even the batteries are going to be the biggest problem and they might even last vacuum packed. Right now as we speak I am listening to 36 year old Advent speakers picked up off Craig's list that were haphazardly stored in someone's damp basement that have capacitors in the crossover network between the woofer and tweeter, and they sound just as good as any audiophile under 1000 dollar speaker.
Don't believe the hype.
I am down with everything you wrote (yes including the 2nd amendment defense) expect lumping in global warming as a non problem. Engaging in global warming denial does nothing to help your case. This is what the peer reviewed journal Science has to say about models predicting anthropogenic climate change:
"IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].
Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).
The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9)."
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686
The deniers meanwhile all end being dunded by fossil fuel industry sources:
A study published in the journal Environmental Politics finds that 92 per cent of 141 English-language environmentally âoeskepticalâ books, most published since 1992, are linked to conservative âoethink tanks.â The authors conclude that the environmental skepticism of such organizations âoeis a tactic of an elite-driven counter-movement designed to combat environmentalism, and that the successful use of this tactic has contributed to the weakening of US commitment to environmental protection.â
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/C25/
See also:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_change_skeptics
"StoneCypher is full of BS" well at least you got that one right...
Sigh!
I have lived in rural northern Michigan and rural Oregon and I have no problem with rural people having trucks (though preferably biodiesel) pickups if they have real hauling to do. But how many SUVs are really sold for that purpose? I'd estimate 5% or less. The rest of them are the leather seat and 8 speaker sound system models (now with more cup holders) sold to yuppie males who THINK they have extremely small penises and are overcompensating with a vehicle. These dimwits will doom us all. :(
p.s I notice you cherry picked the one of two factors out of dozens listed that was trending in a positive direction, nice. To everyone else with a more open mind I suggest reading the WP article to see what its overall conclusions actually are.
"And honestly...when this hits in 2100....I'm very likely NOT to be alive then...so, it isn't like this will affect me."
After you the deluge, eh? Of course conservatives aren't evil mean spirited SOBs who don't care what kind of planet they leave for future generations, how could I ever think that?
If if the result of the aggregate of our individual decisions is ecological disaster what then? Was it really worth it so some smug self centered yuppie could park their Lincoln Navigator next to the Hosta moncrop lining the driveway of their mini-mansion?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/24/AR2008122402174_pf.html
No! Look at Craig's list used cars for example, you can pick up 15 to 20 year old Japanese cars all day long for between 500 to 2000 dollars, and American cars that old, not so much? Why? They went to the crusher already, and I am talking in south east Michigan right in the midst of American auto plants so there were MANY more American cars to start out with.
A heavier car also has more inertia thus it take more energy and more vibration more to start and stop producing more wear. And the more weight you add to compensate for the poor wear performance by beefing the car up even more the worse gas mileage the car gets exacerbating the problem of inefficient poor handling American cars very few people need for the hauling capability even more.
Again read the Malcom Gladwell article it's because SUVs WERE tremendously profitable to make compared to cars. They figured unfortunately correctly that they could SUVs to cubicle drones with poor male self image problems who substituted having a big macho vehicle for having a life. Unfortunately this strategy worked for about 15 years and now the big 3 management is stuck with manufacturing and distribution facilities here geared up to make vehicles no one wants anymore. The big 3 are such big titanic like boats that it will take them a long time (years?) to retool their factories and rethink their marketing strategies. As a Michigan resident I think they should be given the chance to do that, and the blame for the big 3s current failure should be placed squarely where it belongs, management.
And my 19 year old Toyota Corolla has 254,000 miles on it and gets 30 mpg. And guess what BOTH of these examples are anecdotal evidence, I highly doubt on average most American V8s make it to 200,000 miles where many Japanese 4 bangers do.
Except the SUV isn't safer if it flips over when driving a tippy vehicle like a dumbass. I see flipped over SUVs all the time oo 1-94 outside of Detroit. The only good thing about this is at least natural selection over time will weed SUV driving dumbasses out of the population.
"Ethics are different for everyone one," eh? So you don't mind if I kick your door down and shoot you and your family with a pump shotgun if that is MY interpretation of what an ethical action is? When someone has a BFG suddenly postmodern ethical relativism isn't so appealing is it? That my friend is why the only relativists you find are in sophomore college philosophy class rooms, in the real world people know that ethics are the ONLY thing holding us back from man on man fight to the finish barbarism.
Now you are pissing me off SUV apologist, here is the data from the article:
"Make/Model Type Driver
Deaths Other
Deaths Total
Toyota Avalon large 40 20 60
Chrysler Town & Country minivan 31 36 67
Toyota Camry mid-size 41 29 70
Volkswagen Jetta subcompact 47 23 70
Ford Windstar minivan 37 35 72
Nissan Maxima mid-size 53 26 79
Honda Accord mid-size 54 27 82
Chevrolet Venture minivan 51 34 85
Buick Century mid-size 70 23 93
Subaru Legacy/Outback compact 74 24 98
Mazda 626 compact 70 29 99
Chevrolet Malibu mid-size 71 34 105
Chevrolet Suburban S.U.V. 46 59 105
Jeep Grand CherokeeS.U.V. 61 44 106
Honda Civic subcompact 84 25 109
Toyota Corolla subcompact 81 29 110
Ford Expedition S.U.V. 55 57 112
GMC Jimmy S.U.V. 76 39 114
Ford Taurus mid-size 78 39 117
Nissan Altima compact 72 49 121
Mercury Marquis large 80 43 123
Nissan Sentra subcompact 95 34 129
Toyota 4Runner S.U.V. 94 43 137
Chevrolet Tahoe S.U.V. 68 74 141
Dodge Stratus mid-size 103 40 143
Lincoln Town Car large 100 47 147
Ford Explorer S.U.V. 88 60 148
Pontiac Grand Am compact 118 39 157
Toyota Tacoma pickup 111 59 171
Chevrolet Cavalier subcompact 146 41 186
Dodge Neon subcompact 161 39 199
Pontiac Sunfire subcompact 158 44 202
Ford F-Series pickup 110 128 238"
http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html
(safety statistics compiled by Tom Wenzel, a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, in California, and Marc Ross, a physicist at the University of Michigan. ) See article linked above for a better formated table of this data.
Malcolm Gladwell the author of the article:
"Honors
In 2005, Time named Malcolm Gladwell one of its 100 most influential people. He is the author of three New York Times #1 best sellers.[12]
In 2007, he received the American Sociological Associationâ(TM)s first Award for Excellence in the Reporting of Social Issues.[13]
Also in 2007, Gladwell received an honorary Doctor of Letters degree from the University of Waterloo.[14][15]
[edit]Works"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Gladwell
And you? Just some jerk who is defensive about his love of big wasteful cars. Like I said my well documented data from Gladwell's article v.s. more scattered anecdotes. The ball sir is in your court.
Everyone THINKS they are an above average driver but only empirical data tells you what cars are actually safer given a normal distribution of drivers, driving them. Data trumps personal anecdotes of people who self evaluate, get it? Read the Gladwell article which has those statistics and get back to me, m'K?
More people need to hear this message in the U.S. We are soooo far behind Europe and Asia in transportation habit it's not funny. I blame the big 3 relentlessly advertising their WWII truck platforms on tee vee (now with new improved CUPHOLDERS) for a quick easy ethics free buck.
"It's just that I also happen to see trucks as being much better built and ultimately safer to drive."
Except in the rational world of facts you'd be wrong, people drive SUVs too fast in wet and icy conditions leading to these top top heavy vehicles rollin over or not stopping in time. SUVs also suck at accident avoidance which is half the battle due to inertia and poor steering compared to smaller more precise cars. For empirical substation of this see Malcom Gladwell's excellent article on SUVs:
http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html
And as for better built I'd say the average American V8 is very, very lucky to make it to 175,000 miles where as OHC Japanese 4 bangers OFTEN make it to 250,000 and Mercedes diesels and Volvos to 350,000. A heavier car wears out faster due to simply physics even if built to the same build quality standards which American trucks aren't.
In the long run I hope we do have the social will to switch our auto plants here in the U.S. to making hybrids, small diesels, trains, buses, and windmill parts but I am NOT holding my breath. :(
Comparing the luxury of talking on a cell phone while driving to the necessity for many of driving to the store is amazing, I dub thee Sir. Douchebag the 1st douchiest of all douchebags for the entire millennium, Congratulations!!!!!!!
Driving is unfortunately been made very necessary in our society do to for example stores being long distances from houses to food stores, etc. Talking on a cell phone while driving OTH is a non necessity 99% of cell phone talk is gossiphy blather or banal requests to pick up crackers on the way home from work. I don't have a cell phone because even when people aren't driving I think it's rude for example to talk on a cell phone when you are physically with another person.
And I am hardly a luddite I have 2 dual processor Macs the MacBook which runs XP and Ubuntu under VMs and a separates based stereo system. I do however loath cell phones and if I could hit a button to make them all disappear I would do so without even an instants hesitation and as an added bonus probably save hundreds of peoples lives a year. My guess is far more people die from stupid driving mistakes made while using cell phones than are saved during emergencies despite the fact that "emergency" is often the rational people fall back on justify their little "hit me back yo" gossip box.
The fact you can even compare the trivial luxury of gossiping on a cell phone while driving with the utter necessity for survival of growing food shows what a dingle berry chewing deep tonguing butt sucker you are. And that's actually even an insult to innocent gay people that enjoy rim jobs for you are far worse than that!
This is total crap talking on a cell phone while driving is a total non necessity and what's more people KNOW it's a non necessity and do it anyways out of purely self centered spite, that IMO is EVIL and I won hesitate to call people out on it.
I notice you give exactly 0 examples douche!
Your bottom line is your saving two minutes getting to work or blathering meaningless trivialities on a cell phone is more important to you than saving someone's life which is sociopathic and quite literally EVIL IMO. You want to know why some people HATE Americans you are looking at it in the response above, it's the careless, self centered, sociopathic, evil, greed stupid!
Exactly that's why I call them weak minded conformists, they make stupid decisions due to social pressure induced by television advertising. i sincerely hope gas goes back to 4/gallon as the only thing that will influence these heard animal sheeple is the t.v. news telling them a small car is "cool" due to high gas prices, sigh.
It reminds me of that Colbert Report where he drives the Hummer stretch Limo from gas station to gas station, I'm sure that car has an aggressive evil Nazi like "face" that appeals to Americans that put brawn before brains too.
Now I see why you are my foe on slashodot, all it takes in ONE child to run out in the street of all the millions of children in the U.S. while some worthless douchebag piece of human garbage like yourself talks on the cell phone while driving 10 mph over the speed limit for a tragedy to happen that will scar the families life FOREVER.
In sum FUCK YOU you are a subhuman, sociopathic ,EVIL, soulless worthless, deep tonguing ass sucker Cayenne8!!!! You aren't a cute troll you are a worthless waste of the planets precious oxygen for advocating reckless driving.
It's all good until a little kid runs out in front of your car SUDDENLY, right selfish yuppie cell pone talking drivers? Because we all know your S.O. telling you to pick up a quart of milk on the way home from work is way more important than some innocent child's life, right? I am sooooo sick of people who rationalize talking on a cell phone while driving, DON'T period, end of story. Is this advice saves one childs life, or even a dog or cats life then yes it WAS worth getting all in your face about it! No your trivial blather is NOT worth the life of anyone or another living creature get over your self centered self already!
I am going to start a new group ADACPD=
Angry dudes against cell phone driving.
...equals socialized risk and private profits which is frighteningly close to Mussolini's idea of a the quite literally fascist economic structure of corporatism.
OK that makes sense sorry I interpreted it as an attack when it wasn't. :(