- CUM LET GLOBE HACK (FUCK) you - 1 Update
- Boeing 737: Would you book a flight on it? - 1 Update
- Gas ranges - 5 Updates
- Supplements (lastest issue of Consumer R.) - 1 Update
- Weighted blanket - 2 Updates
| GLOBE CRACKER ADMIN <WEHACKYOURWIFI@GLOBE.COM>: Nov 15 11:27PM Get globe wifi and have your connection hacked by their bullshit modems/dns filtering. crap,crap,crap. I am getting wifi nearly for free. I would NEVER pay Globe for internet. Try PLDT fiber MUCH better. |
| Beaver_Fever@live.com: Nov 16 09:27AM -0800 > https://news.google.com/search?q=boeing%20737&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen Standard 737? Of course. 737 Max? Kinda funny how most people don't think of what plane they are flying but everyone has heard of the 737MAX and no one wants to fly on one. |
| John Weiss <jrweiss98155@comcast.net>: Nov 15 10:24PM -0800 On 11/15/2019 15:18, ItsJoan NotJoann wrote: >> https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-11-11-cities-ban-natural-gas-to-fight-climate-change > I read this garbage the other day and before I even started wasting my time > I knew it had to be California. The land of loony people. Seattle is just as bad these days. The mayor proposed the same thing a couple weeks ago... |
| Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com>: Nov 16 06:55AM -0800 On 11/15/2019 10:24 PM, John Weiss wrote: >> I knew it had to be California. The land of loony people. > Seattle is just as bad these days. The mayor proposed the same thing a > couple weeks ago... Well genius, do give us your plan to solve the problem. |
| Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net>: Nov 16 07:15AM -0800 On Friday, November 15, 2019 at 6:18:10 PM UTC-5, ItsJoan NotJoann wrote: > I knew it had to be California. The land of loony people. > It truly makes you wonder if they have considered what powers those electric > plants. Not every place is suitable for the wind turbines. +1 Ain;t that the truth. Though sometimes I am surprised. For example when I heard that a city councilman argued that the city can't hire a power washing company to wash the excrement from the homeless off the streets because it would be racist, I figured that must be CA. Turns out it was Seattle. In case you're wondering how that could be racist, I couldn't fathom it either. The stupid lib argument is that it would be racist because back in the 60s water hoses were used to push back civil rights demonstrators. Never mind that was FIRE HOSES and this is power washers. This natural gas thing is pretty dumb too. Starting with the fact that most of these residences burn the majority of the gas when the sun isn't shining. So, where is the energy going to come from? The same bunch won't build nukes, which alone pretty much discredits the whole world coming to an end soon argument. If the planet is in even a fraction of the danger the global warming proponents claim it is, then we should be go full tilt on nuclear. Even if there is a accident, compared to global disaster and extinction it would pale in comparison. |
| John Weiss <jrweiss98155@comcast.net>: Nov 16 07:35AM -0800 On 11/16/2019 06:55, Bob F wrote: >> Seattle is just as bad these days. The mayor proposed the same thing >> a couple weeks ago... > Well genius, do give us your plan to solve the problem. First, define the problem. Then assess how much people are willing to sacrifice to solve the problem. It is clear to me that the underlying problem is that we have expanded the world population too much to be sustainable at this level, much less any constantly-increasing level above current. My plan is to cut the number of children being born so the world population will shrink to a level that is sustainable. Restrictions on the number of children a couple can have was tried in China, and worked to some extent, but was deemed socially unacceptable. As for the specific issue of natural gas, banning its use is NOT a solution at all! Replacing all that gas use with electricity means electric production will have to be significantly increased. In the near term, until wind & solar with adequate storage is practical on that scale, additional electric production will be via burning natural gas. A gas furnace in the home is 95-98% efficient. Producing electricity from natural gas is AT BEST 50% efficient. So banning home use will actually increase consumption! |
| The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>: Nov 16 08:40AM -0800 On 11/16/2019 06:55 AM, Bob F wrote: >> Seattle is just as bad these days. The mayor proposed the same thing a >> couple weeks ago... > Well genius, do give us your plan to solve the problem. Perhaps change the way the sun works. Altering the laws of physics might also be helpful. Easiest, although less possible, would be slapping some common sense into a lot of people. -- Cheers, Bev "You won't like me when I'm angry because I always back up my rage with facts and documented sources." - The Credible Hulk |
| ggggg9271@gmail.com: Nov 16 01:36AM -0800 https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-finds/2019/02/09/everything-you-need-to-know-before-buying-a-weighted-blanket/#1d1edcf36b07 |
| ggggg9271@gmail.com: Nov 16 01:37AM -0800 > https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-finds/2019/02/09/everything-you-need-to-know-before-buying-a-weighted-blanket/#1d1edcf36b07 Is it machine washable? |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment