You still don't get it. If you can be convinced of either at all, it says a hell of a lot more about you than the other guy. It doesn't matter how much work it takes. It just says that everybody has a price. And it doesn't help to play your little "morality" games with me when you so willingly spend all that blood money used for killing all those people. Or what, now you're going "distance" yourself, by how many degrees of separation will you do that? Please, save your breath.
I can try. But I am not the one who squandered your supply while neglecting to find other sources. Looks like you already fucked yourselves, so I guess I don't have to tell you to... Way to go guys!
If you look around, you will see I don't want to pump in salt water for all the very obvious reasons. But fresh water falls out of the sky all day long. I suspect that harvesting is cheaper than desalination. There's plenty of water all around. The politics blocking distribution is our only issue. We always make up a "reason" not to do something.
Another question is how well it blends in with regular traffic, so that some of those ISP issues and restrictions can be mitigated or circumvented entirely.
Instead of pumping seawater and salting the earth (All that stuff seeps down into the aquifers, you know), why not harvest the falling rain water and pipe that in?
For all the work required to complete a project like this, the plants should at least be edible, if not converted into fuel and construction material. But that would destroy the respective commodities markets, I suppose.
Instead of pumping seawater and salting the earth (All that stuff seeps down into the aquifers, you know), why not harvest the falling rain water and pipe that in?
Why the Sahara? We have our own perfectly good desert right here in the Southwest. Besides that, Australia has a big desert, and their government is fairly stable, isn't it? The only thing that stops us from doing anything at all are the people who say "no". The thing we are truly best at is obstruction.
Uh huh, and do they say what plants they're using for this model? Corn puts out more water vapor than cactus. It said there that "An acre of corn gives off about 3,000-4,000 gallons (11,400-15,100 liters) of water each day". I'll let you do the math that hasn't been done yet. Time will tell how the climate reacts to that 1% difference. It still may be be a minor thing, and it'll give you another opportunity to throw out some more insults. I thrive on that.
Sure, with all that surface area. And you're not really "moving" the water. You're spreading it. I guess you're not aware how much water vapor comes from vegetation that actively pumps it out of the ground. Greening the deserts will produce great consequences, not necessarily harmful to the planet, on the contrary, but human economic issues will make even bigger headlines.
Yeah, right! Feed the hurricanes even more humidity and churned up dust! Just try to picture what would happen if we do green the deserts. You think CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas? Boy are you in for a surprise!
We don't have to nationalize anything, but the government should be allowed to compete. Then we can have more clout in determining prices and services. The law you speak of was specifically set up to benefit the insurance industry. Through a much older law, the government is specifically prohibited from negotiating for better pharma prices. These are the things, among others, that make medicine expensive in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
It's too bad he didn't launch a Model S. At launch we could have said: Look at that S Car go!
Panic and crises are whole industries in and of themselves, pretty easy to see why.
I can't think of one valid use for a toy flamethrower
Unwanted hair removal?
Oh, c'mon! Their money laundering services are second to none! The ads write themselves. 9 out of 10 smugglers agree.
The 10th is with Bank of America.
What? You mean somebody is going to jail?? Customers will be compensated?? The bank is turning over a new leaf?
Say it ain't so!
You still don't get it. If you can be convinced of either at all, it says a hell of a lot more about you than the other guy. It doesn't matter how much work it takes. It just says that everybody has a price. And it doesn't help to play your little "morality" games with me when you so willingly spend all that blood money used for killing all those people. Or what, now you're going "distance" yourself, by how many degrees of separation will you do that? Please, save your breath.
one convinces you... The other convinces you...
Do you see the equivalence yet? If not, then I guess you're right. The propaganda really does work.
And we have the power to vote liars out of the government. Just because we don't doesn't mean we can't.
you can go fuck yourself.
I can try. But I am not the one who squandered your supply while neglecting to find other sources. Looks like you already fucked yourselves, so I guess I don't have to tell you to... Way to go guys!
Are they saying there's a difference between government propaganda and corporate propaganda (advertising)? That's a bit off I would say...
If you look around, you will see I don't want to pump in salt water for all the very obvious reasons. But fresh water falls out of the sky all day long. I suspect that harvesting is cheaper than desalination. There's plenty of water all around. The politics blocking distribution is our only issue. We always make up a "reason" not to do something.
Let's see what their ISPs have to say about this.
Another question is how well it blends in with regular traffic, so that some of those ISP issues and restrictions can be mitigated or circumvented entirely.
Don't blame the tool maker.
You can when they monitor and control the tool.
Yeah well, these kinds of double standards are openly endorsed now by the populace and the people they elect. Truth is personal.
I guess dinner is gonna be a little late.
You're right. See other reply to you:
Instead of pumping seawater and salting the earth (All that stuff seeps down into the aquifers, you know), why not harvest the falling rain water and pipe that in?
For all the work required to complete a project like this, the plants should at least be edible, if not converted into fuel and construction material. But that would destroy the respective commodities markets, I suppose.
Instead of pumping seawater and salting the earth (All that stuff seeps down into the aquifers, you know), why not harvest the falling rain water and pipe that in?
Why the Sahara? We have our own perfectly good desert right here in the Southwest. Besides that, Australia has a big desert, and their government is fairly stable, isn't it? The only thing that stops us from doing anything at all are the people who say "no". The thing we are truly best at is obstruction.
Uh huh, and do they say what plants they're using for this model? Corn puts out more water vapor than cactus. It said there that "An acre of corn gives off about 3,000-4,000 gallons (11,400-15,100 liters) of water each day". I'll let you do the math that hasn't been done yet. Time will tell how the climate reacts to that 1% difference. It still may be be a minor thing, and it'll give you another opportunity to throw out some more insults. I thrive on that.
It only means that new computers are selling rather well.
Yes, pumping that much water vapor into the air will dramatically effect the climate.
Sure, with all that surface area. And you're not really "moving" the water. You're spreading it. I guess you're not aware how much water vapor comes from vegetation that actively pumps it out of the ground. Greening the deserts will produce great consequences, not necessarily harmful to the planet, on the contrary, but human economic issues will make even bigger headlines.
Yeah, right! Feed the hurricanes even more humidity and churned up dust! Just try to picture what would happen if we do green the deserts. You think CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas? Boy are you in for a surprise!
Aren't you happy?
*exact words
We don't have to nationalize anything, but the government should be allowed to compete. Then we can have more clout in determining prices and services. The law you speak of was specifically set up to benefit the insurance industry. Through a much older law, the government is specifically prohibited from negotiating for better pharma prices. These are the things, among others, that make medicine expensive in the US.