Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors - Page 3

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well, I always thought it was "strait" jacket.

Possibly "Straight" Jacket is probably an American version of the
term, the Americans are good at spelling words differently, dropping
and reversing letters, compared to other english speaking peoples.


No, it's that Americans are stupid. They spell it the way it sounds, without
understanding its derivation.



Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope, AFAIK it's straitjacket in the US also.

    Jerry

Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It IS strait jacket, but straight is the alternate spelling.

Jeff

--
"Everything from Crackers to Coffins"

Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT

Quoted text here. Click to load it
Dictionaries reflect usage. They are not rule-books.



Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Good dictionaries do, Macquarie lists words before they become common
enough therefore hastening change.

Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT

"Fuckwit  Murtz"

Quoted text here. Click to load it


** What absolute bollocks.



....  Phil

 



Re: Sommerwanker= Fuckwit PEDANT

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, this is: http://tinyurl.com/phallison


Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Hmmm... I was looking for a suitable costume for Halloween.   That's
an American tradition, where we dress up in scary costumes and
terrorize people like you.

Incidentally, I really enjoy being accused of marginal sanity.  It
demonstrates that you're paying attention.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Your brain self correct for color variations.  Take a photo under
fluorescent tube lamps and you'll get a greenish tint (unless you have
a camera that automagically does color corrections).  Your eyes can be
fooled.  Your camera cannot, as it shows the true color.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Hint: It's yellow.  It should be white or at least more like white
than a mix of red and green.  I suspect that might be what is giving
Arfa problems.  Photographing various CFL lamps, and selecting one
that is closest to white might be a fix.

I just found the package.  It's a FEIT BPCE13T cheapo bulb.  About
$1US as subsidized by PG&E (the local power utility).
<http://energy-star-lighting.findthebest.com/detail/573/Conserv-Energy
2700K which makes it a "warm white".

Quoted text here. Click to load it


--
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Provided there is some respect on both sides and an attempt to undestand
the other POV, I see no reason why a screaming match is necessary. I no
longer waste my time with those who choose to insult, rather than present a
cogent argument. It's better for my health.

Your comments about prices of CFLs have me intrigued. I did some more
research. Here are some prices in the US:

http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Navigation?storeId10%051&N54%2102+90401&langId=-1&catalogId10%053&cm_sp=Electrical-_-LightBulbs-_-CatHighlight-_-CFLs

Prices appear to be somewhat lower than Australia and dramatically lower
than in the UK. I suggest that you should be complaining about CFL prices in
the UK. Clearly, something is seriously awry.

I accept personal preferences for ICs are valid. I accept that personal
preferences against CFLs are also valid. I also accept the testing done by
Choice and others, that prove the efficiency aspects of CFLs are
significantly in advance of ICs. I accept, in the abscence of evidence to
the contrary, that CFLs have a manufacturing energy cost that is
approximately 6 times that of ICs.

Having said all that, there is one aspect of our discussion that I find
deeply troubling. You're a smart guy. Yet you appear to be willing to reject
the overwhelming bulk of good, solid science that has shown that rising CO2
levels are causing the present warming we find ourselves experiencing. You
appear to be rejecting the science, in preference for the hysterical ravings
of those who have clear links to the fossil fuel industry. OTH, the
scientists who study and report on global warming, for the most part, do not
have links to the alternative energy business. They do what a good scientist
should do - report the science without regard to political or business bias.
Consider the NASA and EPA scientists who were issuing very clear warnings to
President Bush. Bush was a rabid global warming denier. We had the same
thing here in Australia. During the Howard government years, Australia's
premier scientific body (the CSIRO) was issuing clear reports to the
government that anthropogenic global warming was going to cause serious
problems for Australia and the rest of the planet. Yet the Howard government
was aligned with the Bush government, in that denial of the science was the
order of the day. In fact, the leftover ministers of the Howard government
are still denying the science, even today. Most are religious loonies, so no
one takes much ntice anymore.

Please do some reading on the topic. Unlike the present discussion on CFLs
(which is really a bit of a distraction), it is a very important issue.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it

On the contrary - few believe in it anymore at least in Australia.
This fraud has been thoroughly exposed for what it is and it is great
to see.  Did you know that the head of the CSIRO is a former bankster,
from the same company that wants to be australia's carbon banker and
there is another sitting on the board there? The banksters cooked up
this scam and funded and promoted it behind the scenes over many years
as the next big cash cow for themselves, and to set up more control
over the people. In other words you and your business pays the tax,
and the big connected bastards get exemptions and you are driven under
and they end up with a monopoly and can charge what they want. This is
how the world works.

Scientists - like most other people in this world get jobs, pay and
research funding based on following the corporate line, and/or party
line, at least to the general public.  Thats just how real life works
in this thoroughly corrupted world.




Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**The dribblers don't count. People who lack a decent education are not
representative of thinking adults. Nor are religious loonies like Alan
Jones, Christopher Monckton and George Pell.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Fraud? Do tell. Please provide your peer-reviewed science that proves that
the CSIRO, the IPCC, NASA, the US EPA, the British Academy of Science, the
US National Academy of Sciences, The German Academy of Science, The
Australian Bureu of Meteorology, The UK MET, The Royal Swedish Academy of
Sciences, The Netherlands Academey of Sciences and a host of other
organisations.

So, over to you: Supply your peer-reviewed science which proves that all
these guys (and many, many other respected scientific organisations) have it
so terribly wrong.


  Did you know that the head of the CSIRO is a former bankster,
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**So? CSIRO has been successful at commercialising many of it's developments
over the years. It makes perfect sense to have people with commercial skills
on the board. The scientists report the science. The board does not.

 The banksters cooked up
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Did they? Prove it.

 In other words you and your business pays the tax,
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Sure. It's how it has always worked. Nothing to do with global warming
though. Excessive CO2 emissions are driving the temperature of this planet
faster than at any time in the last 600,000 years. Nothing to do with
taxation, politics or the opinions of religious nutters.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Is that so? Care to explain why the scientists at the CSIRO reported to
the Howard (AGW denying) government that AGW was a real problem? Care to
explain why the scientists at NASA and the US EPA were reporting to the Bush
(AGW denying) government that AGW was a real problem? According to your
twisted logic, the scientists at all three organisations should have
reported what their political masters wanted. To their credit, the
scientists did what all reputable scientists do - they reported the facts.

  Thats just how real life works
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**OK. Prove it.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Should read:

"....Sciences and a host of other organisations are wrong."


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors


Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Navigation?storeId10%051&N54%2102+90401&langId=-1&catalogId10%053&cm_sp=Electrical-_-LightBulbs-_-CatHighlight-_-CFLs
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Hmmm. You see, this is where I get a bit pissed off. The terms like 'denier'
that get bandied about. This is a carefully chosen word to put those who
have an 'alternate' view, firmly into the same bracket as the holocaust
deniers. And the "You're a smart guy"  ....   but  ...  I can almost see the
head sadly shaking. If you think that I'm so smart, do you honestly believe
that I never do any reading on all this ? Do you think my position on all
this has come about as a result of me just wanting to take an alternate view
for the sake of it ? I don't know what the situation is in your half of the
world, but up here, the whole eco-bollox thing has become like an hysterical
religion. No one is allowed to have an alternate view without being screamed
down as a "denier". When I say that the case is by no means proven, except
in the media, it's reached the point now where the BBC don't basically carry
any news that might present an alternate view. If they do have anyone on a
programme that dares to suggest any alternate view, they make sure that
there are three loud-mouthed greenies in the studio, to shout the person
down. Plus the interviewer of course. It has got so that every news story is
twisted to include the phrases "global warming" and "carbon footprint" and
"CO2 emissions". I'm sick to bloody death of hearing it.

Most of the initial momentum for this whole affair, came from computer
models. Computer models can't even guess your electricity bill correctly,
when they can't be bothered to read your meter, and that's with just a few
variables involved. A lot more of the fuel comes from the University of East
Anglia here in the UK, where the badly flawed 'hockey stick' graph came
from, that sought to show the rapid warming, that actually hadn't taken
place. The guy in charge of all this was suspended from his position, after
his emails were obtained, showing communications with his contemporaries,
inviting them to massage the data to fit the model. It was largely as a
result of this, that the last big convention up in Scandinavia fell apart,
as it was taking place when all this came out. What kind of science is that
? What kind of scientist is he ?

My big problem is that the greenies don't have an open mind about the
situation. As far as they are concerned, it is fully proven, done, dusted,
and anyone who doesn't follow blindly down the path, is a heretic. Well, I'm
sorry, but in my mind, as long as there is the slightest doubt, the case
isn't proven and closed, and a good scientist should keep his mind open.
Fortunately, there is a recent groundswell of alternate view from a number
of equally reputable scientists, who are finally having the balls to stand
up and be counted.

And as for people being in the pay of the fossil fuel industry, have you
stopped to consider the multi-billion dollar industry that is now the green
movement ? Do you think that for some reason, because they are greenies,
they are somehow nicer people than those in fossil fuel ? Not prepared to
have people in their pay to say what they need them to ? If the whole
man-made global warming argument were to collapse, it would spell the death
of the green industrial machine, with no less implications and impact that a
similar demise of the fossil fuel industry would have.

I quite understand that you feel strongly that the case for man-made global
warming is made with 100% certainty. That is your prerogative. But please
understand that I, and many others also read the same data and arguments,
and arrive at a different conclusion. I don't have a closed mind on the
subject. I am still open to persuasion if indisputable data is presented.
But I would really like it to all become detached from the religious
hysteria that has gripped the world over it.

I don't have a problem with accepting that the weather patterns are
changing. But then they always have throughout recorded history. Maybe man's
activities do have a contributory effect. But I seriously don't believe that
all of the changes that are perceived are down to things that we are doing.
There are many other factors that contribute to weather patterns, and some
of them may be more significant than some of the pseudo-science about man's
activities, would have everyone believe. As far as I am concerned, the jury
is still out.

Anyway, that's my piece said. I don't suppose it will change anything, and I
expect there will still be a lot of people pursing their lips and shaking
their heads at this poor deluded fool, but hey-ho. That's life, and I don't
really have the inclination to spend any more time on it now.

Arfa


Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:14:53 +0100, "Arfa Daily"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

<snip>

Quoted text here. Click to load it

See any problem with what you've said between the two paragraphs?

Hmmm, indeed.

Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I don't see anything inconsistent whatsoever.  What i see is two
statements that the AGW crowd has failed to make their case, and they
resent anyone saying so.   I also see refusal to join shouting matches.
So, what do you see?

?-)

Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Navigation?storeId10%051&N54%2102+90401&langId=-1&catalogId10%053&cm_sp=Electrical-_-LightBulbs-_-CatHighlight-_-CFLs
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I was EXTREMELY careful in my use of the term 'denier'. I did not call you
a denier (though you may well be - or not). I called John Howard (and his
government) and George W Bush deniers. I was quite specific. John Howard was
a lawyer and a politician. He has little knowledge of scientific matters.
George W Bush was/is a drug-addled college drop-out, whose daddy managed to
keep him out of gaol and then became a politician. His knowledge of
scientific matters was/is virtually non-existent. Both these men employed a
bunch of very smart climate scientists (the EPA, NASA, US Academy of
Sciences - in the US. CSIRO, BoM, Australian Academy of Science - in
Australia) to inform them on the situation regarding climate change (aka:
global warming) and the relevance of human influence. ALL these
organisations informed both men that there was almost no doubt that human
induced global warming was a serious problem that needed to be addressed.

Not only did these men ignore the advice of the scientists that they paid to
inform them, but they actively denied the overwhelming evidence presented
and decided that the people who are employed by the fossil fuel industy were
correct.

That is what I call a denier.

 And the "You're a smart guy"  ....   but
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Not at all. We've had dealings in the past and I have no issues with the
term. As a technical guy, you will likely have a good grounding in science.
I find it curious that you've managed to find fault with everything in the
IPCC AR4 though. I tazke it that you've read the report? All 1,600 odd
pages?

 If you think that I'm
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I'm sure you do. Have you read the IPCC reports?

Do you think my position on all this has come about as a
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Possibly. Many people take such a view.


 I don't know what the situation is in your half of the world,
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**As it should be. Many researchers have predicted that if CO2 levels reach
500ppm, positive feedback will ensue and there will be nothing humans can do
to prevent catastrophic warming from occuring. At least one researcher
believes that the 'tipping point' has already been reached. It would seem
prudent to listen to the guys who study climatology, rather than the guys
who speak for the fossil fuel industry in this matter.

 No one is allowed to have an alternate view without being
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Well, it would seem that, since climatologists study the climate, ignoring
what they say is, at a very minimum, stupid.

 When I say that the case is by no means
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**The Murdock controlled media claims it is all wrong. The scientific medai,
OTOH, has made it's case very clear. AGW is a problem.

 it's reached the point now where the BBC
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Perhaps the BBC is concentrating on facts, rather than fiction. I accept
that. They leave the fiction, lies and distortions to the Murdock media.
Would you prefer that the BBC was more like the Murdock media?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I have no problems with charlatans being exposed. In fact, I support it.

 Plus the
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Given the fact that it is a very serious problem, you should expect to her
a great deal about it.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**No, it did not. The initial momentum came about during the early 1970s
(which is when I first began reading about CO2 induced global warming in the
pages of Scientific American). The warming that was occuring was begining to
alarm researchers. Sometime later (1988), the IPCC was set up to investigate
the measured warming.

 Computer models can't even guess your electricity bill
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I am familiar with the illegally obtained emails, which were carefully
cherry-picked for release, in a shabby attempt to discredit some very
dedicated scientists. Fortunately several independent inquiries have
exonerated the scientists.

 It was largely as a result of
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**A very good scientist, actually. Of course, if you had taken the time to
investigate the matter, you might realise that the (Murdock controlled?) did
a number on the CRU.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Some do. Some don't.

 As far as they are concerned, it is fully proven, done,
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Nope. The only people who don't accept the reality of AGW are:

* Idiots.
* Religious nutters.
* Fossil fuel apologists.
* Those who are too lazy to read the best information on the issue (AR4).

 Well, I'm sorry, but in my mind, as long as there is the
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Indeed. Have you read AR4? All 1600-odd pages?

 Fortunately, there is a recent
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Wrong. There are a very, very tiny number of climate scientists who
challenge the consensus view. Most are paid by the fossil fuel industry and
are, therefore, suspect. The opinions of scientists whose discipline is not
climate science are not of much interest.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**What are you attempting to draw a comparison here with? A wind turbine
manufacturer, compared to Exxon? Yeah, right. The fossil fuel industry is
extremely well-funded, entrenched and uses EXACTLY the same tactics as those
employed by the tobacco industry. In fact, they use the same organisations
to promote their position. THAT should send warning bells to any sane
person.

 Do you think that for some reason, because they
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I am not talking about nice. I'm talking about science. Keep the
discussion centred on the science. Personalities are a spurious issue.

 Not prepared to have people in their pay to say what they need them
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Some people say what they're paid to say and some say what they believe.
And some say what the science says. They're the scientists and they are the
only ones I care about.

If the whole man-made global warming argument were to collapse,
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**You may as well ask what would happen if NASA admitted that the Moon
landing was bullshit. It happened. Global warming is happening. The trend is
impossible to refute.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Call it 95% certainty. That's close enough for me. If my local fire
authorities suggested that there was a 95% probability that my home would be
destroyed in a bushfire within the next 10 years, I'd make certain my
insurance policy covered such an event. Are you one of those people who
prefers to cling to the 5% possibility? I call that dumb.

 That is your prerogative.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Have you read AR4?

 I don't have a
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**It's science, not religion.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Just a reminder: We're discussing CLIMATE change, not the daily weather.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**NO ONE EVER said that humans were solely responsible. The Sun is the major
driver of climate on this planet. CO2 is _a_ driver of climate. A small one.
Small, but significant. CO2 is not insignificant.


 There are many other factors that
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Have you read AR4?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Take some time to read AR4. THEN get back to me.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:46:26 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The reports are here:
<http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml
I've only read the one on the physical science basis.

The 5th report is scheduled for release in stages from Sept 2013 thru
Oct 2014.  It's focus is a bit different than previous reports.
<http://www.ipcc.ch/activities/activities.shtml
  "...AR5 will put greater emphasis on assessing the socio-economic
  aspects of climate change and implications for sustainable
  development, risk management and the framing of a response
  through both adaptation and mitigation."
In other words, it will tell the governments and politicians what to
do.  I can't wait.





--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**No, it won't. It will, like a good scientific document, ADVISE on
appropriate course/s of action. They are not likely to be pleasant and will
be resisted by the Murdock media and the fossil fuel industry. There is
certainly no doubt that many nations will be dragging their feet on the way
to reduce CO2 emissions.


Will our society survive? I doubt it. It seems more likely that action will
be too little too late.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:03:13 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"

Quoted text here. Click to load it


True.  Climate researchers don't run the government or run for office.
Politicians tend to pick whatever helps them win:
<http://woods.stanford.edu/?q=research/surveys-climate-energy/climate-views-elections

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Also true.  However, the AGW deniers do serve a vital function.  If
everyone agrees with the IPCC consensus, there would be no need for a
5th report, no need to fund research, and no need to debate the
issues.  Without opposition, the IPCC would probably be disolved.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Of course.  When in doubt, do nothing.  That may sound awful, but it
has served mankind quite well since we climbed out of the trees.  If
we were more impulsive, we would probably be extinct by now. Evolution
sometimes rewards aggressive action.  Human society does not.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

As opposed to too much too early?  That seems to be the real problem.
I don't think there's any serious opposition to the observation that
the global climate is changing.  It has changed before and will
certainly do so again.  The real questions are is it caused by human
activity and can we do anything about it?  The options are not very
appealing.  Leave things as they are, and civilization comes to an
end.  Drastically downsize the population with a corresponding
reduction in greenhouse gas production, and it's almost as likely that
we would also put an end to civilization, at least as we know it
today.  Since genocide and enforced austerity are not popular
concepts, the compromise is to do nothing, which we are now doing
quite nicely.

Drivel:  I used to work for a boss who's motto was "Do something, even
if it's wrong".  He ended his career by doing something really wrong,
instead of thinking it out in advance.  Hopefully, we won't make the
same mistake with AGW.


--
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
Quoted text here. Click to load it
<http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml
Quoted text here. Click to load it
<http://woods.stanford.edu/?q=research/surveys-climate-energy/climate-views-elections
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**The nice thing about reducing CO2 emissions, is that there is no serious
downside. It's only about the money and where it is spent. If all the
climate scientists are correct and we fail to act, then the costs may exceed
the ability of the population of this planet to pay.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Site Timeline