Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 3 Nov 2006 08:20 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > The embargo was reducing deliveries to certain countries unless > they capitulated into obeying. No it wasn't. Go read some history. Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Nov 2006 08:23 In article <cAq2h.21305$TV3.15219(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >news:29d9e$454a2b92$4fe71d7$24986(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >>> "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>> news:5578b$454a10c6$49ecfab$24208(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>> >>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:3c732$4549ec30$4fe7336$23388(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Eeyore wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I am not talking about oil becoming uncompetitive. I am talking >>>>>>>>about oil suddenly becoming unavailable. That should be a >>>>>>>>scenario considered by all heads of state, not just the US. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It's not going to happen short of nuclear war. >>>>>> >>>>>>You're obviously not old enough to personally >>>>>>remember the fuel crisis of the early 1970's. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>First you say you're not talking about an embargo, >>>> >>>>Who are you talking about? Your imaginary conflation >>>>of two distinct individuals? >>>> >>>> >>>>>then as evidence that it will happen, >>>> >>>>Oil becoming unavailable by embargo is a historical >>>>fact. >>> >>> >>> I never said it wasn't....although strictly speaking, the 1970s embargo >>> just tightened supply, it didn't become "unavailable". It was the US >>> government's braindead decision to impose price controls that prevented >>> demand from matching the reduced supply through price increases, thereby >>> creating shortages. As others have pointed out, everywhere else that >>> allowed the price to float only experienced higher prices and as a >>> result, reduced consumption, not unavailability. >>> >>> >>> >>>>The discussion you led us into has to do with >>>>can/can't happen. >>> >>> >>> Uh, no....please try to keep up. I was pointing out that if it does >>> happen it won't matter a whit if we've built hundreds of nuclear plants >>> or not, since we will not have the electric cars to make use of the >>> increased supply of electricity. >> >> >> In the US we have what can only be described as an overkill >> in residential electrical services. The minimum permitted >> these days is 100 Amps @ 240 volts. In fact, people are >> being forced to upgrade to that minimum by their homeowners >> insurance. > >This is a fairly small factor, since relatively little heating is done by >fuel oil--something like 5% of US households, I don't believe that. Gas lines aren't as common as electirc poles. >and much of that in older >homes that can benefit from improved insulation, if the economic benefit is >there. The rest is domestically supplied--either natural gas or already >electric. Add to this the fact that much of the oil home heating will be >taken up by natural gas, since it is much cheaper in most markets. And add >to this the fact that it is in the summer, not the winter, that the electric >grid is stretched to anywhere near its limit. No, it's not. Ours is stretched in the winter too. If everybody goes to electric heating, there will black outs during the winter. > The need for more electric >plants to supply the increase in electric home heating would be minimal. Around here there oodles of oil delivery companies. So we must be all that 5%..which, of course, is nonsense. > > >> So rthe plain fact is we could easily and quickly switch >> most free standing residences to electric heat in a big >> hurry if the need arises. Manufacturing and distributing >> electric baseboard or, even simpler, plenum style heating >> elements, is trivial. Electric domestic water heaters >> are simple devices. > >This is a completely negligible factor, since very little residential hot >water comes from oil burners. It's already almost all domestically >sourced--either electric or natural gas. Now study your natural gas biz. There's a problem there, too. > > >> Automobiles form part of our consumption. There are many >> other uses, including significant industrial consumption. > >Much of that is raw materials for the petrochemical industry, which cannot >be replaced by nuclear power. Very little industrial heating is done by >fuel oil. Mostly it's natural gas, which is already a domestic supply. Most of the industrial heating my Dad put in was oil, not gas. This was pre-1970. But oil supplied better steam heat than gas...hmmm... I don't why. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Nov 2006 08:26 In article <454B41A0.D3070554(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> > >> >> I am not talking about oil becoming uncompetitive. I am talking >> >> about oil suddenly becoming unavailable. That should be a >> >> scenario considered by all heads of state, not just the US. >> > >> >It's not going to happen short of nuclear war. >> >> Sigh! That will happen unless steps are taken to prevent the >> mess. > >And the best way to avoid a 'mess' is for the USA to get its nose out of stuff >that it has no place interfering with. Would it have been OK with you if the US stopped containing Saddam and his excursions north and south? /BAH
From: lucasea on 3 Nov 2006 08:31 "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message news:1a092$454b0b4c$4fe74c1$30350(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > >> "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >> news:b44c0$454a9541$49ecfd8$27465(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> >>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>> >>> >>>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>>news:40570$454a2bd8$4fe71d7$24986(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>>> >>>> >>>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:d38ed$454a0d9f$49ecfab$24139(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>news:11089$45495c2e$4fe7052$20335(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Eeyore wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>In article <4546F871.E7AD0EB5(a)hotmail.com>, >>>>>>>>>>>>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Also compare the availability of goods and services in Europe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>and other places in the world to ours. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>What !!!! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Are you being funny ? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>No, he's not. There are a lot of Europeans who come to the US >>>>>>>>>>>>to shop. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>There have been many flights bringing Europeans to shop at >>>>>>>>>>>the Mall of America in Minnesota. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Cite ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Stuff it, fool. I've been there and talked with some of >>>>>>>>>the people. I've also shopped at Gurnee Mills which is >>>>>>>>>a one story affair with a mile long zig-zag mall under >>>>>>>>>roof. I first ran into them there, later at Mall of >>>>>>>>>America. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Mall of America is so large, for your information, that >>>>>>>>>there's an amusement park in the center, including a >>>>>>>>>roller coaster. It set itself up to be an international >>>>>>>>>destination. You don't suppose that a setup like that >>>>>>>>>could be supported solely by sales to the Twin Cities >>>>>>>>>and Minnesota folks within an easy drive, do you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>And yet despite all that, you still only have a handful of anecdotes >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>from a few travellers who have done it. Useless. If you're going >>>>>>>>to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>claim "there have been many flights...", you better supply data on >>>>>>>>it, otherwise you're being hoodwinked by the very same thing you >>>>>>>>chastise other people for--seeing only the evidence they want to >>>>>>>>see. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Bwahahahaha. Trying to create a hard science where there is none? >>>>>> >>>>>>Hey, I wasn't the one that made the unsupportable claim, based on a >>>>>>few anecdotes. >>>>> >>>>>BS, you do it constantly. >>>> >>>> >>>>Cite three examples, please. >>> >>>Just read your article just prior to this one, and the >>>two following it. They're full of unsupportable claims >>>coming from you, most of them made-up by you to >>>promote your anti-American views. >> >> >> If so, then you should surely be able to come up with three examples of >> unsupportable claims. We're still waiting. > > I just did. It appears you're dumber than even I thought. No, I'm holding your feet to the fire. I want you to list 3 unsupportable claims, and prove that they are unsupportable. Your bluster about my intelligence cannot hide the fact that you simply label anything that is inconsistent with your slanted view of the world as "unsupporrtable", "dumb", and several other pejorative adjectives. Nice basis for a worldview. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 3 Nov 2006 08:33
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:454B0DE8.56581EB8(a)hotmail.com... > > > unsettled wrote: > >> Eeyore wrote: >> > unsettled wrote: >> > >> >>You're making stuff up once again. >> > >> > >> > I saw nothing made up. >> >> You made up a "fact" that the poll was scientific. > > Me ? I haven't commented on it at all. Do please get your attributions > right ! She's so used to her second alias that she thinks *everybody* has an alter ego to stroke them on Usenet. >> >>Don't you ever get >> >>tired of having to invent facts to support your anti- >> >>American views? >> >> > Are you saying it's anti-American to report that Iraqis want US troops >> > to leave >> > their country ? >> >> > If so - why ? >> >> It is anti-American to keep claiming that when you have >> no facts to support the idea, only a "report" from >> suspect sources. > > What's suspect about them ? They don't agree with her worldview. >> It is the overall thrust of your posts >> that gives any reasonable reader the idea that you're >> anti-American. > > I ask again.... " Are you saying it's anti-American to report that Iraqis > want US > troops to leave > their country ? " If it's anything closer to the middle of the road than, say, Fox News, then I guarantee her answer will be "yes". Labels and name-calling are her way of avoiding discussing facts honestly. Eric Lucas |