|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 4, 2024 15:56:13 GMT -5
Good morning. I missed this yesterday, but April 3 is the anniversary of the launch of the Pony Express, founded in 1860. I have always liked this recruiting poster: "Orphans preferred"
I think $25 per week must have been very high wages at that time. Unfortunately for the career minded, the job only lasted a few months. Unfortunately for the career minded, it's a lifetime gig.
|
|
|
Sheesh.
Apr 4, 2024 15:52:17 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by aquaduct on Apr 4, 2024 15:52:17 GMT -5
As a mailman observer I would guess that fewer than 10% of American's cars are kept in garages. Certainly not in our neighborhood. Most houses here don't have garages, and if they do they're used as rec rooms or places to store motorcycles.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2024 21:37:26 GMT -5
My wife’s Prius has 280,000 miles on it and we are committed to getting it to 300K. By turning it over we would be negating all the $ we save in gas. The best automotive economy is keeping your car. Absolutely. Wife and I figured that out 14 years ago. What matters is assets. Even more so when the income gets thin. My F150 is at 121,000 miles and counting. Enthusiast magazines seem to think the Coyote engine is good for half a million miles. Going to keep it until I'm buried in it.
|
|
|
Sheesh.
Apr 3, 2024 20:29:19 GMT -5
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2024 20:29:19 GMT -5
Do understand there are "online physicists" armed with decades old faux arguments developed and strewn wide by conservative, oil-funded think tanks, think tanks working overtime weaving half-truths and total nonsense, arguments a junior high physics instructor with only two classes under his belt would be embarrassed to make. Most certainly you would not ever hear a real physicist confusing somethings percentage of the whole with the effect that thing can exert upon the whole. A germ, an hydrogen atom, an easily excited gas molecule bouncing wildly off other tiny molecules, such tiny things the lot of them. And talk about the thermodynamics of a blanket over a rock to debunk the Greenhouse Theory? It is dumb analogy, but if pursued, pursue it correctly and recognize that the rock is not the source of the rock's heat, the sun is. And if the sun heats the rock, a blanket over that rock come evening will help hold/store the heat it gained from the sun's radiation. Outside of Facebook, the science behind the Greenhouse Theory is not in dispute. The arguments against global warming are not with the science, but with the conclusions drawn. There are fair arguments over the degree of, the effects of, the result of... bottom line, arguments over actions to be taken or not taken and the resulting cost of actions is taken or not taken (and an argument coming up strong on the inside rail, it's too late/beyond our ability to do anything, so carry on and hope for something other than the worst. Hmmmm..... "oil funded think tanks"? Is that an anything like the NRDC and the state of Massachusetts suing to change the meaning of the Clean Air Act to include CO2, a non-pollutant, as a regulatable "pollutant" rather than just going about it the old-fashioned way- getting 218 votes in the House and 60 votes in the Senate? Are you absolutely sure you want to discuss who's lying? Particularly given the craven nature of those cowards? Over 40 years no less? And maybe the destruction of America's manufacturing infrastructure at the hands of these creeps who insist on back dooring crap that won't stand up in the light of day? Are you dead sure before you endorse that crime?
|
|
|
Sheesh.
Apr 3, 2024 19:14:00 GMT -5
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2024 19:14:00 GMT -5
Ah yes, the "warm comfy blanket" theory. Already heard it ad nauseum. Except it kind of violates the First and Second laws of Thermodynamics and a few more. By the way, if you put a warm comfy blanket on a rock, the rock wouldn't get any warmer. That's because warm comfy blankets help things that are producing heat (like your body) retain that heat. But rocks and the earth don't produce heat. If anything the warm comfy blanket would make the world colder by keeping the sun's thermal energy away from the planet. Hmmm... go figure. And then there's the famous Arrhenius "experiment" that fills one bottle with CO2 and the other with air. And behold, the CO2 bottle gets warmer. Therefore, we're all going to die if we don't drive EVs. Of course, if the CO2 bottle was filled with the proper atmospheric proportion of CO2 (again, that's 0.04%. For the mathematically challenged, that's virtually nothing) one probably wouldn't amount to squat. Then you've got the IPCC wankers "proving" that the planet is warming. How? Statistical models. Now anybody who has actually studied statistics knows the problem of too many degrees of freedom in your statistics. Basically, too many degrees of freedom generate too many confounded interactions. In essence, with almost infinite degrees of freedom in the planetary climate, any number you come up with is guaranteed to be wrong by an unquantifiable amount. That's why, in my business, you have to do empirical tests to get certification. In simpler terms, strap the vehicle or engine to a dynamometer and run a simulated drive cycle saving exhaust gases in bags and then measuring specific amounts of regulated pollutants (have I mentioned yet that EPA never refers to CO2 as a pollutant? That's because it isn't a pollutant) in order to be permitted to sell that vehicle or engine. Suggesting they should accept your modelled numbers would get you laughed out of the room. And then there's the absolutely horrifying implications of forcing the extinction of arguably the greatest invention of all time- the internal combustion engine. If you think I'm tedious for questioning specious politically tainted "science", the carnage of banning internal combustion engines is absolutely unforgivably criminal. And as it sits now, that's only 11 years away.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2024 11:50:54 GMT -5
And yet, we're to believe without question that 0.04% of the atmosphere is unnaturally warming the planet. You're a one-trick pony, Peter. I understand where you're coming from on the front line, so to speak, of emission regulations. The earth over it's existence has had wildly different atmospheric makeup. For many Millenia it was an ice planet. Over other Millenia, CO2 was high and the planet was a tropical rain forest; even at the poles. CO2 and other so-called greenhouse gasses were the critical to those swings. Is the planet's atmosphere one constant thing? Surely not. Will human habitation be affected by future swings? Certainly yes. Will we, as insects crawling on the surface, be able to make a difference? Maybe. But our increasing population and increasing use of earth's natural resources flies in the face of any small tweaking we try to do. I suppose "it's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness" applies. But at what cost to daily life and what, if any, benefit? Good whiskey solves more dilemmas than anything else I know. Well, this is a one trick board. It's just that my trick is different than everyone else's.
|
|
|
Sheesh.
Apr 3, 2024 11:47:42 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2024 11:47:42 GMT -5
It is true that the different gasses that make up what we call "air" have different weights. If the various weights (most slightly so) were the only force at play, then the earth would have a stratified by weight atmosphere (and we wouldn't be here...gasp, choke). But, the earth, thankfully, doesn't have a stratified atmosphere. The sun's heat energizes all those different gas molecules and they bounce around each like ping pong balls in a bingo tumbler. This isn't theory, it is measured fact, the gas molecules that make up our atmosphere are mixed and that heavy CO2 is found bouncing around like Tigger Too eight miles high in our atmosphere. Exactly. Just like pouring 4 ounces of boiling water into a bathtub of cold water will warm that bath right up.
|
|
|
Sheesh.
Apr 3, 2024 8:49:18 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2024 8:49:18 GMT -5
And yet, we're to believe without question that 0.04% of the atmosphere is unnaturally warming the planet.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 2, 2024 13:50:32 GMT -5
I've been reading about that along with all the long term follow on problems that have come out of Obamacare. The main one being corpratization. Then was a provision in Obamacare (can't remember details now) but it was meant to cap costs and ended up merging everything and cutting availability of everything from doctors to hospitals.
Being a diabetic, I'm seeing it in spades.
My endocrinologist is the only one within about 60 miles I think. My guess is he will have to go concierge soon to simply keep his sanity.
And then I'm dependent on a Dexcom device. A stone miracle for a diabetic.
Been having an absolute nightmare getting supplies for the last 9 or 10 months.
In September I was trying to reorder and they needed a prescription. So I had to hand walk the process through roughly a month of dumb f'ups on the suppliers part.
So I tried all the alternatives. Maybe I can get it from a regular pharmacy. Nope, not if I want our insurance to cover it. It's got to be a durable medical goods supplier.
Called Solara (the f'ing supplier) and talked to one of the rotating crew of Pakistanis who barely speak English one Tuesday night and he assured me it would be here overnight which I assumed was Wednesday. Then he started referring to Thursday when it would be here. So I stopped him and asked where he was at that moment. The Philippines. Ah! Time zone trouble. Didn't matter in the end because nothing showed up Thursday either. Nor Friday. Nor Monday.
Later one of phone answerers transferred me to Dexcom directly. He was an American technician and gave me another number to call to find a better supplier.
So I did. To make it short, big zero there. Then I called our insurance to see if they could help.
She called me back and offered 2 numbers, one of which has a warehouse operation in Winchester. Awesome!
Call up and find out the company sales offices are in Harrisonburg. Okay, I'll bite.
Well they farm some stuff like Dexcom through a sub supplier, "Let me transfer you."
Ring, ring..... "You have reached Solara Medical Supply...."
At that point I literally wept. Wife took pity on me and found an outfit in New Jersey that would sell me my supplies without a prescription (and of course without insurance).
A couple weeks later one of the foreign automatons called me and asked if I wanted to refill my prescription. I purposely with all my might politely asked for a manager. Instead of saying that the entire management of the company was in training and couldn't be bothered like usual, she said she'd have a manager call me back.
Surprisingly, a manager did. She actually listened to me as I cursed a blue streak and she took notes. And my supplies showed up a few days later.
Just went through it again and things seemed to have improved for now.
But good lord, the medical profession seems to be up to its ass in alligators these days.
Thanks Barry. Love ya, mean it.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 1, 2024 7:50:23 GMT -5
CO2 emission reduction efforts in the automotive industry are global. The US is not going to be avoiding the trend. Only as long as the West insists on committing industrial suicide. There's nothing that locks the US automotive industry into that pact should Chevron fall in June. You Europeans are welcome to continue self immolation to your hearts content. But we've always been significantly different than you both politically and geographically.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 31, 2024 19:21:07 GMT -5
If “compromise” means meet in the middle (some of what I want and some of what you want) I agree with Peter that no good will come from it. If I want shit and you want caviar, shitty caviar won’t be a satisfactory solution. Proposed programs are often only useful if they are implemented just as intended by the design, not pulled apart and modified to death. Changing the program will likely be worse than both full implementation and complete abandonment. We need a congress whose members have both the time, resources, and inclination to fully understand what it’s doing and the political will to stay on course and forget the culture wars. Congress discovered in roughly the late sixties that actually legislating was too much of a career risk. You know, if your name is on a vote for a piece of legislation that somebody doesn't like, that's ammunition to defeat you. So they stopped doing that and simply created regulatory agencies like the EPA to do the heavy, faceless lifting while they just voted to fund the agencies. Who could argue with paying for important stuff, particularly if it's jammed inside an omnibus spending bill that normal humans can't possibly decipher? Cute, huh? The last piece of actual legislation that squeaked through Congress (barely) was Obamacare in 2010 or 2011. In 1984 environmentalists figured out how to end around the requirements to actually get what they want through legislation by getting a liberal Supreme Court in Chevron v. NRDC to let the agencies (specifically EPA in this case) decide for themselves what a crappy piece of legislative bloat like the Clean Air Act really meant. Then, in 2007, they went for the throat with a victory (not really a victory, more of a WTF do we do with this shit now that we've painted ourselves into a corner?) that gave EPA the right to regulate CO2 through Massachusetts v. EPA. A big part of why I'm looking forward to Chevron falling is that, once that con game of making big money for nothing blows up, Congress will have no choice but to start doing their damn jobs again.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 31, 2024 17:24:38 GMT -5
Having played in a few praise and worship bands, I can't tell you how funny that is.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 31, 2024 17:22:23 GMT -5
Compromise has gotten us an EPA ban on internal combustion engines by 2035... Well, just for the sake of accuracy, there is no stated ban on the internal combustion engine. There are looming standards that might put an end to the sale of new vehicles that are powered by gasoline or diesel, but the internal combustion engine may still be around for quite a while if it is powered by a fuel that doesn't release CO2, and hydrogen is such a fuel. Only the future will tell what ends up working or not working, but several major car manufacturers are developing cars with internal combustion engines, good old V8s, V6s, and 4 bangers that run on hydrogen instead of gasoline or diesel. So far, they aren't exploding. Time will tell. The future is so tricky to predict. [can't get video to work. This link should] www.caranddriver.com/news/a42796089/2024-honda-cr-v-powered-by-hydrogen-details/[Toyota's work] www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGL5g91KwLAHydrogen as a fuel sucks (10% of the energy capacity of gasoline or diesel). Probably worse than EVs. So as we move toward 2035, vehicle makers (not just cars, but also semis, crane trucks, combines, ships, trains, lawn mowers- they're all under EPA's regulatory authority and CO2-free mandate) will be forced to build vehicles nobody wants and will not be able to make vehicles people do want. This can only serve to crater and destroy a major portion of our industrial base. And the business of doing the hard work that supports everything about modern life will similarly collapse. Welcome to an almost unimaginable dystopia. Hope y'all like it when you get it.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 31, 2024 16:35:40 GMT -5
But still not even close to the best solution. I am willing to agree to disagree with you, Peter. I think compromise is closer to the best (better?) solution than you think it is. Everyone makes sacrifices, but also make progress.
Compromise has gotten us an EPA ban on internal combustion engines by 2035. Welcome to the wholesale destruction of the country. That's anywhere near the best solution to anything in this country?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 31, 2024 16:15:51 GMT -5
But still not even close to the best solution. The best for who? Anybody.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 30, 2024 21:40:13 GMT -5
Compromise simply means that the outcome sucks for everybody involved. Or it's the closest thing to the best solution that everyone can live with. A pessimist says the glass is half empty. An optimist says the glass is half full. An engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
But still not even close to the best solution.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 30, 2024 20:35:45 GMT -5
Compromise simply means that the outcome sucks for everybody involved.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 30, 2024 15:02:23 GMT -5
"Lyrics are just wasted time between guitar solos."- old Gibson ad.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 30, 2024 14:59:17 GMT -5
I've seen pictures of Wes. He seemed blacker. He's also gotten cuter. Quite a trick for a dead man.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Mar 30, 2024 10:46:00 GMT -5
"I like politicians who are at least willing to consider compromise. there are few of those." I agree on both counts. Unfortunately, many voters see a willingness to compromise as a lack of principle that merits removal from office. I'd disagree. I'd say our willingness to compromise has led us to a political quagmire from which has emerged a thoroughly out of control Federal government. In my view compromise is thoroughly overrated. Our system is supposed to make sure that things that are not worth actually doing don't get done. Things that are worth doing should take relatively little compromise.
|
|