Frugal Living: misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 3 topics

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* OT: Climate Change - 17 messages, 10 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/644bf640f475d0c1?hl=en
* Why people don't commute by bike? - 5 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5a940e0b0554395e?hl=en
* Does TAKING THE LANE slow down traffic? - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/53572018da3c57f0?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT: Climate Change
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/644bf640f475d0c1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 7 2010 11:09 pm
From: The Real Bev

On 08/07/10 22:48, David Hare-Scott wrote:

> The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 08/07/10 11:04, Billy wrote:
>>
>>> Three independent reviews into the affair were initiated in the UK,
>>> two of which were concluded by the end of March 2010, with the
>>> remaining review releasing its findings on 7 July.
>>>
>>> The scientific consensus that "global warming is happening and that
>>> it is induced by human activity" was found unchallenged by the
>>> emails[12] and there was "no evidence of any deliberate scientific
>>> malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit."
>>
>> And Bill Clinton didn't have sex with that woman -- Monica Lewinsky.
>
> Unless you know more through some sort of magic than all the authorities who
> investigated this issue this is just a taunt. We already know there is a
> slice of the population who believe the conspiracy theory you don't need to
> repeat that or declare you are a member.

I guess you missed -- or ignored -- the bit about "analyze the data
yourself and come to your own conclusion."

We're not talking about believing in Santa, the Easter Bunny or Jesus here.

--
Cheers, Bev
==================================================
Segal's Law: A man with one watch knows the time.
A man with two is never sure.

== 2 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 1:10 am
From: Higgs Boson

On Aug 7, 10:19 am, Billy <wildbi...@withouta.net> wrote:
> In article <8c4hjeFe3...@mid.individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
>
> Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> room,

But totally around the bend, Vitamin C-wise

but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.

Einstein had TWO Nobels, and spent the last 30 years of his life
chasing the GUT
(Grand Unified Theory) that would include gravity. All that time, he
basically refused
to accept Quantum Theory, but continued to function partly in & partly
out of Classical.
The battles between Nobelist Niels Bohr (who was himself stuck on
Complementarity)
and Einstein are legendary. Nobelist Johnny von Neumann, one of the
greatest mathematicians
of all time, led physicists down his own garden path for decades. And
on and on.

Great scientists aren't always free of obsessions. (Maybe that's part
of what makes them great?)

== 3 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 4:10 am
From: Cheryl Isaak

On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au, "Billy"
<wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:

> In article <8c4hjeFe31U1@mid.individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
>
> Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.

Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too many
Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified level
requires a bit of "loon".

== 4 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 4:14 am
From: root

David Hare-Scott <secret@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> The conspiracy theorist either conveniently forget (or never understood)
> that the scientific community around the world would be last place to try to
> organise a conspiracy. First, there is no central authority to enforce
> silence or conformity. Second, the way to fame in the scientific world is
> to go against the prevailing wisdom AND to win by providing the evidence. I
> am not saying there are no errors or disagreements but a global conspiracy
> of climatologists is just a joke. Let me say it another way: if he/she has
> the evidence there is a huge reward for the scientist who breaks ranks and
> they cannot be effectively censored.
>

Your paragraph assumes that the work of the IPCC is science: it is not.
Science is open, science allows the work to be examined and reproduced
if possible. Science welcomes criticism. The review of the climategate
material misses the point that every effort was made to conceal the
materials and methods behind their work.

Before undertaking any measures to combat climate change all the
data should be made freely available in a public repository. All
computer models should be open source and freely available. All
aspects of the data collection methods should be public information.

== 5 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 6:57 am
From: despen@verizon.net

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:

> Analyze the data yourself. Form your own conclusion.

"Analying the data" consists of taking many readings and comparing
the data to the output of very sophisticated computer models.

I've yet to see ONE critic even claim that they've developed a
computer model, found a problem with the existing computer models,
or that they have their own readings.

Your taunt about forming your own conclusions reveals a stricking
ignorance about the subject.

== 6 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 9:59 am
From: Billy

In article <C88408C9.A7BEB%cherylisaak@comcast.net>,
Cheryl Isaak <cherylisaak@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
> wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au, "Billy"
> <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <8c4hjeFe31U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
> >
> > Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> > room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
>
>
> Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too many
> Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified level
> requires a bit of "loon".
>
>
> C

Anecdotally, I've been taking 1 g of vitamin C/day since the early 70s
and 6 g/day if I have a cold (which is rare).

I doubt there is any silver bullet for either colds, or cancer (The
latter seems to be part of "metabolic syndrome". Staying away from
polyunsaturated oils, would probably help.).

Besides his work on vitamins, he published "The Nature of the Chemical
Bond, one of the most influential chemistry books ever published.[72] In
the 30 years after its first edition was published in 1939, the book was
cited more than 16,000 times. Even today, many modern scientific papers
and articles in important journals cite this work, more than half a
century after first publication."
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>

"Pauling was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all
time by the magazine New Scientist, with Albert Einstein being the only
other scientist from the twentieth century on the list."
SEE LEGACY: Ibid)

And of course he was a "peace activist", who declined an invitation from
Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project.

He was also one of the first to advocate a glass of wine a day, for a
longer life;O)

For his efforts he received The Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1954), and The
Nobel Peace Prize (1962). We definitely could use more loons like Linus
Pauling
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html

== 7 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 10:11 am
From: Bill who putters

In article
<wildbilly-74E3AC.09590308082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
Billy <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:

> In article <C88408C9.A7BEB%cherylisaak@comcast.net>,
> Cheryl Isaak <cherylisaak@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
> > wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au, "Billy"
> > <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <8c4hjeFe31U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
> > >
> > > Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> > > room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
> >
> >
> > Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too many
> > Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified level
> > requires a bit of "loon".
> >
> >
> > C
>
> Anecdotally, I've been taking 1 g of vitamin C/day since the early 70s
> and 6 g/day if I have a cold (which is rare).
>
> I doubt there is any silver bullet for either colds, or cancer (The
> latter seems to be part of "metabolic syndrome". Staying away from
> polyunsaturated oils, would probably help.).
>
> Besides his work on vitamins, he published "The Nature of the Chemical
> Bond, one of the most influential chemistry books ever published.[72] In
> the 30 years after its first edition was published in 1939, the book was
> cited more than 16,000 times. Even today, many modern scientific papers
> and articles in important journals cite this work, more than half a
> century after first publication."
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>
>
> "Pauling was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all
> time by the magazine New Scientist, with Albert Einstein being the only
> other scientist from the twentieth century on the list."
> SEE LEGACY: Ibid)
>
> And of course he was a "peace activist", who declined an invitation from
> Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project.
>
>
> He was also one of the first to advocate a glass of wine a day, for a
> longer life;O)
>
> For his efforts he received The Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1954), and The
> Nobel Peace Prize (1962). We definitely could use more loons like Linus
> Pauling

I thought one award Pauling received was due to pointing out the
dangers of open air nuclear bomb testing.

http://thurly.net/ukd

All in all exceptional scientist with a large field of expertise.

--
Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
globalvoicesonline.org

== 8 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 10:23 am
From: Bill who putters

In article <b2forewagner-162A99.13113708082010@news.supernews.com>,
Bill who putters <b2forewagner@snip.net> wrote:

> In article
> <wildbilly-74E3AC.09590308082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
> Billy <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <C88408C9.A7BEB%cherylisaak@comcast.net>,
> > Cheryl Isaak <cherylisaak@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
> > > wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au,
> > > "Billy"
> > > <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <8c4hjeFe31U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
> > > >
> > > > Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> > > > room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
> > >
> > >
> > > Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too
> > > many
> > > Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified level
> > > requires a bit of "loon".
> > >
> > >
> > > C
> >
> > Anecdotally, I've been taking 1 g of vitamin C/day since the early 70s
> > and 6 g/day if I have a cold (which is rare).
> >
> > I doubt there is any silver bullet for either colds, or cancer (The
> > latter seems to be part of "metabolic syndrome". Staying away from
> > polyunsaturated oils, would probably help.).
> >
> > Besides his work on vitamins, he published "The Nature of the Chemical
> > Bond, one of the most influential chemistry books ever published.[72] In
> > the 30 years after its first edition was published in 1939, the book was
> > cited more than 16,000 times. Even today, many modern scientific papers
> > and articles in important journals cite this work, more than half a
> > century after first publication."
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>
> >
> > "Pauling was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all
> > time by the magazine New Scientist, with Albert Einstein being the only
> > other scientist from the twentieth century on the list."
> > SEE LEGACY: Ibid)
> >
> > And of course he was a "peace activist", who declined an invitation from
> > Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project.
> >
> >
> > He was also one of the first to advocate a glass of wine a day, for a
> > longer life;O)
> >
> > For his efforts he received The Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1954), and The
> > Nobel Peace Prize (1962). We definitely could use more loons like Linus
> > Pauling
>
> I thought one award Pauling received was due to pointing out the
> dangers of open air nuclear bomb testing.
>
> http://thurly.net/ukd
>
> All in all exceptional scientist with a large field of expertise.

A short biography.

http://www.internetwks.com/pauling/alp.html

--
Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
globalvoicesonline.org

== 9 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 10:50 am
From: Billy

In article <i3lf4h$kuq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 08/07/10 21:18, Billy wrote:
>
> > In article<i3l812$jta$3@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > The Real Bev<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/07/10 11:04, Billy wrote:
> >>
> >> > Three independent reviews into the affair were initiated in the UK, two
> >> > of which were concluded by the end of March 2010, with the remaining
> >> > review releasing its findings on 7 July.
> >> >
> >> > The scientific consensus that "global warming is happening and that it
> >> > is induced by human activity" was found unchallenged by the emails[12]
> >> > and there was "no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in
> >> > any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit."
> >>
> >> And Bill Clinton didn't have sex with that woman: Monica Lewinsky.
> >
> > Actually, the judge said he could use the dictionary definition, which
> > was vaginal, so TECHNICALLY he didn't have sex with that woman.
> >
> > But what does that have to do with "Global Warming", or do you just like
> > to talk about oral sex? Do you have something to say? Spit it out.
>
> That governments and governmental leaders will say what they need to say
> regardless of the truth, and that you can find "independent reviewers"
> to arrive at whatever conclusion you want -- or can afford.
>
> Where did they find an "independent review" panel composed of persons
> who (a) can evaluate the data; (b) can evaluate the language used; and
> (c) have no connection one way or the other with the global warming
> controversy?
>
> The globe gets warmer and cooler and has done so for quite a long time.
> I think it would be more sensible to try to figure out how to deal
> with change rather than engage in the rather fruitless undertaking of
> trying to stop it.
>
> Analyze the data yourself. Form your own conclusion.

Well, Bev, we can all agree that CO2 levels are going up, right? And we
can all agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, right? We can all agree that
the pH of the oceans is dropping, right? So if there aren't a couple of
hidden volcanoes somewhere in the world, where does all this CO2 come
from?

Coupled with "Global Warming" is a short fall in potable water by 2030.
Agree or disagree?

We have already past the carrying capacity for Homo sapiens on Earth.
Number 7 billion arrives next year, 9 billion in 2050, 12 billion in
2067.
Agree or disagree?

Humanity is approaching a definitive moment for our species.
Agree or Disagree?

The people working at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), are meteorologists. I couldn't help but notice that only 494
signers of the petition project study the atmosphere.
(I) Atmospheric Science (112)
II) Climatology (39)
III) Meteorology (343)
but
1,684 Geologists have signed the petition. Now call me impetuous, but
aren't these the kind of guys that coal mines, and oil companies hire?
You know, the people who make money by putting CO2 in the sky. Maybe,
I'm just cynical.

So tell me, I'd look this up, but I have other things I need to do, this
petition, does it address the rising CO2 levels, or does it just say
that the IIPC has it all wrong? I mean, if your guys have a position
paper, please tell me were it can be found.

As that war criminal Rumsfeld once said, "part of what we worry about is
not knowing if we know, what to worry about" (more or less), e.g.
anybody can make a mistake.

The simple choices come down to this.
Do nothing, and risk "Extinction 6*", or
do something that wasn't necessary, and look foolish.
Which bet are you prepared to lose?

*
<http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=00037A5D
-A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000>
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html

== 10 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 10:56 am
From: Billy

In article <icr5i9cimj.fsf@verizon.net>, despen@verizon.net wrote:

> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Analyze the data yourself. Form your own conclusion.
>
> "Analying the data" consists of taking many readings and comparing
> the data to the output of very sophisticated computer models.
>
> I've yet to see ONE critic even claim that they've developed a
> computer model, found a problem with the existing computer models,
> or that they have their own readings.
>
> Your taunt about forming your own conclusions reveals a stricking
> ignorance about the subject.

More over, after the Republicans (please, they were just in power then)
shut do the Office Of Technology Assessment, they claimed that all
science that couldn't be done in a lab with reproducible results
(modeling) was "junk science".
The Republican War on Science (Aug. 25, 2006) by Chris Mooney
<http://www.amazon.com/Republican-War-Science-Chris-Mooney/dp/B000WCNU44/
ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1281289895&sr=1-1-spell>
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html

== 11 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 11:03 am
From: Billy

In article <b2forewagner-162A99.13113708082010@news.supernews.com>,
Bill who putters <b2forewagner@snip.net> wrote:

In 1958, Pauling joined a petition drive in cooperation with the
founders of the St. Louis Citizen's Committee for Nuclear Information
(CNI). This group, headed by Washington University professors Barry
Commoner, Eric Reiss, M. W. Friedlander, and John Fowler, set up a study
of radioactive strontium-90 in the baby teeth of children across North
America. The "Baby Tooth Survey," headed by Dr. Louise Z. Reiss,
demonstrated conclusively in 1961 that above-ground nuclear testing
posed significant public health risks in the form of radioactive fallout
spread primarily via milk from cows that had ingested contaminated
grass.[43][44][45] Pauling also participated in a public debate with the
atomic physicist Edward Teller about the actual probability of fallout
causing mutations.[46] In 1958, Pauling and his wife presented the
United Nations with the petition signed by more than 11,000 scientists
calling for an end to nuclear-weapon testing. Public pressure and the
frightening results of the CNI research subsequently led to a moratorium
on above-ground nuclear weapons testing, followed by the Partial Test
Ban Treaty, signed in 1963 by John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html

== 12 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 11:54 am
From: "Rod Speed"

Billy wrote
> Cheryl Isaak <cherylisaak@comcast.net> wrote
>> Billy <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

>>>> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.

>>> Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy
>>> in the room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.

>> Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way
>> too many Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that
>> rarified level requires a bit of "loon".

> Anecdotally, I've been taking 1 g of vitamin C/day since
> the early 70s and 6 g/day if I have a cold (which is rare).

And I havent bothered in more than 50 years and havent had a cold in decades now.

> I doubt there is any silver bullet for either colds,

Pity that fool Pauling claimed there is, without a shred
of rigorous scientific evidence to substantiate that claim.

> or cancer (The latter seems to be part of "metabolic syndrome".

Easy to claim. Pity you cant actually substantiate that claim.

> Staying away from polyunsaturated oils, would probably help.).

Easy to claim. Pity you cant actually substantiate that claim.

Some societys with some of the lowest cancer rates in the world use poly unsaturated oils extensively.

> Besides his work on vitamins, he published "The Nature of the
> Chemical Bond, one of the most influential chemistry books
> ever published.[72] In the 30 years after its first edition was
> published in 1939, the book was cited more than 16,000 times.

Irrelevant to whether he was always a complete loon on vitamins.

> Even today, many modern scientific papers and articles in important
> journals cite this work, more than half a century after first publication."

Fuck all do in fact now.

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>

Doesnt even mention some of his sillier stuff.

> "Pauling was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all
> time by the magazine New Scientist, with Albert Einstein being the
> only other scientist from the twentieth century on the list."
> SEE LEGACY: Ibid)

> And of course he was a "peace activist", who declined an invitation
> from Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project.

Whoopy fucking do.

> He was also one of the first to advocate a glass of wine a day, for a longer life;O)

Another lie.

> For his efforts he received The Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1954), and The Nobel
> Peace Prize (1962). We definitely could use more loons like Linus Pauling

We certainly could do without fools like you.

== 13 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 12:05 pm
From: Chris

On Aug 8, 1:23 pm, Bill who putters <b2forewag...@snip.net> wrote:
> In article <b2forewagner-162A99.13113708082...@news.supernews.com>,
> Bill who putters <b2forewag...@snip.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <wildbilly-74E3AC.09590308082...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
> > Billy <wildbi...@withouta.net> wrote:
>
> > > In article <C88408C9.A7BEB%cherylis...@comcast.net>,
> > > Cheryl Isaak <cherylis...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
> > > > wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au,
> > > > "Billy"
> > > > <wildbi...@withouta.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > In article <8c4hjeFe3...@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
>
> > > > > Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> > > > > room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
>
> > > > Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too
> > > > many
> > > > Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified level
> > > > requires a bit of "loon".
>
> > > > C
>
> > > Anecdotally, I've been taking 1 g of vitamin C/day since the early 70s
> > > and 6 g/day if I have a cold (which is rare).
>
> > > I doubt there is any silver bullet for either colds, or cancer (The
> > > latter seems to be part of "metabolic syndrome". Staying away from
> > > polyunsaturated oils, would probably help.).
>
> > > Besides his work on vitamins, he published "The Nature of the Chemical
> > > Bond, one of the most influential chemistry books ever published.[72] In
> > > the 30 years after its first edition was published in 1939, the book was
> > > cited more than 16,000 times. Even today, many modern scientific papers
> > > and articles in important journals cite this work, more than half a
> > > century after first publication."
> > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>
>
> > > "Pauling was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all
> > > time by the magazine New Scientist, with Albert Einstein being the only
> > > other scientist from the twentieth century on the list."
> > > SEE LEGACY: Ibid)
>
> > > And of course he was a "peace activist", who declined an invitation from
> > > Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project.
>
> > > He was also one of the first to advocate a glass of wine a day, for a
> > > longer life;O)
>
> > > For his efforts he received The Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1954), and The
> > > Nobel Peace Prize (1962). We definitely could use more loons like Linus
> > > Pauling
>
> > I thought one award Pauling received was due to pointing out the
> > dangers of open air nuclear bomb testing.
>
> >http://thurly.net/ukd
>
> > All in all exceptional scientist with a large field of expertise.
>
> A short biography.
>
> http://www.internetwks.com/pauling/alp.html
>
> --
> Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
> globalvoicesonline.org

It is also worth noting that Pauling would most likely have beaten
Watson & Crick to discovering the structure of DNA- had he had access
to Wilkins' and Franklin's data. But because of his pacifist
tendencies, he was denied a passport by the US State Department, and
could not travel overseas.

Chris

== 14 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 12:06 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Billy wrote
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote
>> Billy wrote
>>> The Real Bev<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Billy wrote

>>>>> Three independent reviews into the affair were initiated in the
>>>>> UK, two of which were concluded by the end of March 2010,
>>>>> with the remaining review releasing its findings on 7 July.

>>>>> The scientific consensus that "global warming is happening and
>>>>> that it is induced by human activity" was found unchallenged by
>>>>> the emails[12] and there was "no evidence of any deliberate scientific
>>>>> malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit."

>>>> And Bill Clinton didn't have sex with that woman: Monica Lewinsky.

>>> Actually, the judge said he could use the dictionary definition, which
>>> was vaginal, so TECHNICALLY he didn't have sex with that woman.

>>> But what does that have to do with "Global Warming", or do you just
>>> like to talk about oral sex? Do you have something to say? Spit it out.

>> That governments and governmental leaders will say what they need
>> to say regardless of the truth, and that you can find "independent
>> reviewers" to arrive at whatever conclusion you want -- or can afford.

>> Where did they find an "independent review" panel composed of persons
>> who (a) can evaluate the data; (b) can evaluate the language used;
>> and (c) have no connection one way or the other with the global
>> warming controversy?

>> The globe gets warmer and cooler and has done so for quite a long
>> time. I think it would be more sensible to try to figure out how to deal
>> with change rather than engage in the rather fruitless undertaking of
>> trying to stop it.

>> Analyze the data yourself. Form your own conclusion.

> Well, Bev, we can all agree that CO2 levels are going up, right?

Yes, but they were MUCH higher in the distant past.

> And we can all agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, right?

Doesnt mean that that is necessarily a bad thing.

> We can all agree that the pH of the oceans is dropping, right?

Wrong.

> So if there aren't a couple of hidden volcanoes somewhere
> in the world, where does all this CO2 come from?

Yes, it likely does come from the activity of man, currently.

> Coupled with "Global Warming" is a short fall in potable water by 2030. Agree or disagree?

Disagree that it matters, its completely trivial to produce more potable water when its required.

> We have already past the carrying capacity for Homo sapiens on Earth.

Thats just plain wrong.

> Number 7 billion arrives next year, 9 billion in 2050, 12 billion in 2067.
> Agree or disagree?

It isnt possible to predict what we will see in 2067.

The Club of Rome predicted all sorts of stuff that didnt happen.

> Humanity is approaching a definitive moment for our species.
> Agree or Disagree?

Thats just plain wrong.

> The people working at the Intergovernmental Panel
> on Climate Change (IPCC), are meteorologists.

Plenty of them arent.

> I couldn't help but notice that only 494 signers of the petition project study the atmosphere.
> (I) Atmospheric Science (112)
> II) Climatology (39)
> III) Meteorology (343)
> but 1,684 Geologists have signed the petition.

Petitions arent rigorous science.

> Now call me impetuous, but aren't these the kind
> of guys that coal mines, and oil companies hire?

Hardly any of them are hired by those.

> You know, the people who make money by
> putting CO2 in the sky. Maybe, I'm just cynical.

Certainly you are just a one eyed fool that hasnt got
a fucking clue about what rigorous science is about.

> So tell me, I'd look this up, but I have other things I need
> to do, this petition, does it address the rising CO2 levels,
> or does it just say that the IIPC has it all wrong?

Petitions arent rigorous science.

> I mean, if your guys have a position paper, please tell me were it can be found.

That aint rigorous science either.

> As that war criminal Rumsfeld once said, "part of what
> we worry about is not knowing if we know, what to worry
> about" (more or less), e.g. anybody can make a mistake.

> The simple choices come down to this.

Like hell they do.

> Do nothing, and risk "Extinction 6*", or
> do something that wasn't necessary, and look foolish.
> Which bet are you prepared to lose?

You aint established that there is any bet to lose.

> *
> <http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=00037A5D
> -A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000>

== 15 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 12:33 pm
From: Billy

In article
<f96596d6-50fc-42af-ab4d-8089eb87d112@q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
Chris <chris.linthompson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 8, 1:23 pm, Bill who putters <b2forewag...@snip.net> wrote:
> > In article <b2forewagner-162A99.13113708082...@news.supernews.com>,
> > Bill who putters <b2forewag...@snip.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > In article
> > > <wildbilly-74E3AC.09590308082...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
> > > Billy <wildbi...@withouta.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > In article <C88408C9.A7BEB%cherylis...@comcast.net>,
> > > > Cheryl Isaak <cherylis...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
> > > > > wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au,
> > > > > "Billy"
> > > > > <wildbi...@withouta.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > In article <8c4hjeFe3...@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete
> > > > > >> loon.
> >
> > > > > > Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
> > > > > > room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
> >
> > > > > Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too
> > > > > many
> > > > > Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified level
> > > > > requires a bit of "loon".
> >
> > > > > C
> >
> > > > Anecdotally, I've been taking 1 g of vitamin C/day since the early 70s
> > > > and 6 g/day if I have a cold (which is rare).
> >
> > > > I doubt there is any silver bullet for either colds, or cancer (The
> > > > latter seems to be part of "metabolic syndrome". Staying away from
> > > > polyunsaturated oils, would probably help.).
> >
> > > > Besides his work on vitamins, he published "The Nature of the Chemical
> > > > Bond, one of the most influential chemistry books ever published.[72]
> > > > In
> > > > the 30 years after its first edition was published in 1939, the book
> > > > was
> > > > cited more than 16,000 times. Even today, many modern scientific papers
> > > > and articles in important journals cite this work, more than half a
> > > > century after first publication."
> > > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>
> >
> > > > "Pauling was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all
> > > > time by the magazine New Scientist, with Albert Einstein being the only
> > > > other scientist from the twentieth century on the list."
> > > > SEE LEGACY: Ibid)
> >
> > > > And of course he was a "peace activist", who declined an invitation
> > > > from
> > > > Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project.
> >
> > > > He was also one of the first to advocate a glass of wine a day, for a
> > > > longer life;O)
> >
> > > > For his efforts he received The Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1954), and
> > > > The
> > > > Nobel Peace Prize (1962). We definitely could use more loons like Linus
> > > > Pauling
> >
> > > I thought one award Pauling received was due to pointing out the
> > > dangers of open air nuclear bomb testing.
> >
> > >http://thurly.net/ukd
> >
> > > All in all exceptional scientist with a large field of expertise.
> >
> > A short biography.
> >
> > http://www.internetwks.com/pauling/alp.html
> >
> > --
> > Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
> > globalvoicesonline.org
>
> It is also worth noting that Pauling would most likely have beaten
> Watson & Crick to discovering the structure of DNA- had he had access
> to Wilkins' and Franklin's data. But because of his pacifist
> tendencies, he was denied a passport by the US State Department, and
> could not travel overseas.
>
> Chris

Saw a video of him modeling possible configurations of DNA. He used
scissors and folded paper, like we all did in kindergarten to make
snowflakes but his were helixes, and all kinds of amazing shapes.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html

== 16 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 3:38 pm
From: "David Hare-Scott"

Higgs Boson wrote:
> On Aug 7, 10:19 am, Billy <wildbi...@withouta.net> wrote:
>> In article <8c4hjeFe3...@mid.individual.net>,
>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
>>
>> Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
>> room,
>
> But totally around the bend, Vitamin C-wise
>
> but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
>
> Einstein had TWO Nobels, and spent the last 30 years of his life
> chasing the GUT

I know this is really trivial but he didn't. Pauling is the only person who
has ever got two Nobel prizes in their own right. Einstein got one and that
was for the photoelectric effect not for relativity.

> (Grand Unified Theory) that would include gravity. All that time, he
> basically refused
> to accept Quantum Theory, but continued to function partly in & partly
> out of Classical.
> The battles between Nobelist Niels Bohr (who was himself stuck on
> Complementarity)
> and Einstein are legendary. Nobelist Johnny von Neumann, one of the
> greatest mathematicians
> of all time, led physicists down his own garden path for decades. And
> on and on.
>
> Great scientists aren't always free of obsessions. (Maybe that's part
> of what makes them great?)

A better point.

David

== 17 of 17 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 3:40 pm
From: "David Hare-Scott"

Cheryl Isaak wrote:
> On 8/7/10 1:19 PM, in article
> wildbilly-EBC6E3.10194907082010@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au,
> "Billy" <wildbilly@withouta.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <8c4hjeFe31U1@mid.individual.net>,
>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Pauling had a PhD and an Nobel Prize and was always a complete loon.
>>
>> Pauling has TWO Nobel Prizes and was always the smartest guy in the
>> room, but I will cede to your superior familiarity with loons.
>
>
> Having actually worked for a different Nobel prize winner and way too
> many Ph.Ds, I think I can honestly say that to get to that rarified
> level requires a bit of "loon".
>
>
> C

AND their expertise does not necessarily transfer to other topics. The
author of the article wthat started all this is a quantum physicist not a
climatologist.

David

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why people don't commute by bike?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5a940e0b0554395e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 6:38 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"

On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...@mac.com> wrote:

> > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road. There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> Ken

Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:

1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
car)

2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
another job or move.

3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
maybe you sweat at work anyway.

Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
"What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"

A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
SUV to be important, etc."

-------------------------------------------------------------

"TAKE THE LANE, TAKE THE LANE, TAKE THE LANE"

http://webspawner.com/users/BIKEFORPEACE

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 6:55 am
From: Derek C

On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road. There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > Ken
>
> Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> car)
>
> 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> another job or move.
>
> 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> SUV to be important, etc."
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------

I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
fiddly, heavier and slower.

Derek C

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 7:06 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"

On Aug 8, 6:55 am, Derek C <del.copel...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road. There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > > Ken
>
> > Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> > 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> > enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> > cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> > car)
>
> > 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> > another job or move.
>
> > 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> > maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> > Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> > "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> > fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> > A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> > herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> > SUV to be important, etc."
>
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
> central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
> knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
> fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
> me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
> which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
> applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
> conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
> fiddly, heavier and slower.
>
> Derek C
>
> Derek C

Thank you. Do you think the new opening of the Velib may change many
people's minds? I think it will here in Miami Beach, adding safety in
numbers.

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 9:29 am
From: Derek C

On Aug 8, 3:06 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 6:55 am, Derek C <del.copel...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> > Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > > > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road. There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > > > Ken
>
> > > Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> > > 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> > > enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> > > cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> > > car)
>
> > > 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> > > another job or move.
>
> > > 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> > > maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> > > Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> > > "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> > > fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> > > A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> > > herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> > > SUV to be important, etc."
>
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
> > central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
> > knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
> > fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
> > me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
> > which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
> > applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
> > conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
> > fiddly, heavier and slower.
>
> > Derek C
>
>
> Thank you. Do you think the new opening of the Velib may change many
> people's minds? I think it will here in Miami Beach, adding safety in
> numbers.- Hide quoted text -
>

I would use decent marked cycle paths, separated from the main road,
if they where available. Unfortunately the psycholists would rather
die (literally) than use them, because they would no longer be able to
ride in the 'primary position' and hold up the drivers of motor
vehicles.

Derek C

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 10:35 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"

On Aug 8, 9:29 am, Derek C <del.copel...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 3:06 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 6:55 am, Derek C <del.copel...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> > > Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > > > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > > > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > > > > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road. There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > > > > Ken
>
> > > > Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> > > > 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> > > > enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> > > > cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> > > > car)
>
> > > > 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> > > > another job or move.
>
> > > > 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> > > > maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> > > > Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> > > > "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> > > > fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> > > > A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> > > > herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> > > > SUV to be important, etc."
>
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > > I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
> > > central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
> > > knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
> > > fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
> > > me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
> > > which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
> > > applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
> > > conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
> > > fiddly, heavier and slower.
>
> > > Derek C
>
> > Thank you. Do you think the new opening of the Velib may change many
> > people's minds? I think it will here in Miami Beach, adding safety in
> > numbers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> I would use decent marked cycle paths, separated from the main road,
> if they where available. Unfortunately the psycholists would rather
> die (literally) than use them, because they would no longer be able to
> ride in the 'primary position' and hold up the drivers of motor
> vehicles.
>
> Derek C

Right, such is the fate of bike facilities when money gets dumped in
war. But whatever we got here (a mixed path) is so wasteful and poorly
designed that it's better designed for the people walking dogs.

I'm for both at this point: TAKE THE LANE for the adventurous, and
BIKE PATHS for the peace of mind. Dedicated bike lanes don't take you
where you need to go and are not connected.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Does TAKING THE LANE slow down traffic?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/53572018da3c57f0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 8:24 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"

A couple of days ago, my good but unintelligent neighbor got mad when
I told him of my campaign to TAKE THE LANE. No way he should be slowed
down when he drives from his job in the boondocks. I think he hates me
now. Probably we would be hated by everyone out there who's been
programmed to drive, never mind the fact they sit for hours in traffic
jams. The fact that ONE MORE BIKE MEANS ONE FEWER CAR escapes their
imagination --if they ever use it. I think they want the cyclists off
the road and on the sidewalk, where they become a problem for
pedestrians.

Anyway I want to go into the science behind it and try to prove that
TAKING THE LANE doesn't slow traffic from the current system in which
the drivers must move somewhat into the next lane not to hit you. This
creates, first of all, a "no man's land" area and a cascading effect
in which he's watching both the cars and the cyclist, where the
cyclist is at risk, and the next car may not even be aware of the
presence of the bike. If the car must exit your lane, however, he
passes in a smooth way --ONLY BEING CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC-- and
leaving the cyclist unaffected and safe.

I understand that asking for mercy and SPACE for those at the bottom
of the food chain --for both cyclists and pedestrians-- is highly
altruistic... but such are the demands of civilization.

-------------------------------------------------------------

THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS

"Evolution OR Revolution --that is the question"

http://webspawner.com/users/BIKEFORPEACE

"WE NEED SPACE TO LIVE, YOU KNOW"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uQ9ybSgnTg

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 9:17 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"

On Aug 8, 9:01 am, Connie <conrad.gel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I bicycle all the time, on rural, suburban, and city roads. At no time
> do I take the lane when any alternative exists. Of course there are
> times, short stretches usually, when no space exists to let cars by,
> but then I always speed up as much as possible until the bottleneck is
> passed. Bicycles generally travel at 12-15 mph, while cars go at above
> 25mph in most conditions. It seems selfish and unnecessarily
> provocative to take the lane (especially in caps).

It seems provocative to start making sense out senseless driving.
Nobody will ever change it because that's the way it has been for the
last 50 years. The result is few people dare ride a bike. And the ones
that do, do it on the sidewalk.

Aren't we provoking pedestrians in their turf?

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Aug 8 2010 11:32 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"

On Aug 8, 11:13 am, Hachiroku ハチロク <Tru...@e86.GTS> wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 10:49:21 -0700, His Highness the TibetanMonkey,
> Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
>
>
> > A couple of days ago, my good but unintelligent neighbor got mad when
> > I told him of my campaign to TAKE THE LANE.
>
> Not a problem. If you TAKE THE LANE like one lame-brain did on a blind
> corner, there will be one less bicyclist on the road as well.

Wrong. When you take the lane you are more visible around blind
curves.

>
> Hey, I ran across a Tercel White Hawk for sale...

I thought they would give them away. ;)

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Frugal Living

Blog Archive

Sunday, August 8, 2010

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 3 topics - digest

No comments: