Menu Bar
bryander's Comments
Re: Still Life
This character is a menace. When you find yourself tripping in a town of mannequins, you've still gotta know it's a bad idea to demolish a whole family of em with a baseball bat.
By: bryander
Re: How Do They Do It: Aluminium
interesting that the narrator noted that after land is denuded of its bauxite that it's replanted to encourage return of plants and animals (that survived). I wonder how often this happens--are there laws requiring it? I find it hard to believe that companies struggling to compete with lower-cost, perhaps less-regulated countries like China, would voluntarily spend any add'l % of their revenues.
By: bryander
Re: Fat Albert Cartoon Opening Theme
wow! never noticed the change of paint color on the paintbrush btwn live Bill and cartoon Fat Albert. and I certainly saw this show enough times as a kid.
By: bryander
Re: McCain Graduated Fifth from the Bottom of his Class
I agree completely. Either libertarianism or anarchy would work great, if only everyone could behave with respect and love for others and the planet. And be organized enough to do so without inadvertently causing physical harm.
Govt ultimately has to be what drives the solution--whether it's through raising standards and controls over those it employs, or pulling back and focusing on the fundamentals: public schools, healthcare, clean air & water, and supporting ecosystems so they may continue to support biologic diversity for needs of future generations.
Govt ultimately has to be what drives the solution--whether it's through raising standards and controls over those it employs, or pulling back and focusing on the fundamentals: public schools, healthcare, clean air & water, and supporting ecosystems so they may continue to support biologic diversity for needs of future generations.
By: bryander
Re: Off The Grid with Les Stroud
Yeah, interesting. Was this an abridged version? Some parts seemed out of place and questions left unanswered--like why did they need suddenly to build a second cabin? what happened to the rain-collection system they'd settled on earlier? we learn they'd need to truck in water come winter, but then how'd they been getting water through the prior mos? and how were they suddenly able to drill a well when just prior it was unaffordable and they planned to do (another?) rain collection system?
By: bryander
Re: Daily Show: There Will Be Flood
"This is what happens when you win the White House by wishing on a cursed monkey paw."
By: bryander
Re: Important Info On Low Energy Light Bulbs
you're kidding, right? If no, then the answer is Yes, I'm still for removing what you call a life-giving gas now that I'm "partially educated" reading your post.
1st, carbon isn't a gas. Carbon dioxide, aka CO2, is. I refer to carbon itself because it's the origin of the carbon that's significant to my argument, more than the obvious fact that CO2 is the chief green-house warming gas we're concerned with when we talk about carbon.
If the carbon we're talking about is in the form of cellulose in a tree, that's then chopped down and into logs, that we then burn in a fireplace for heat; that's much different than carbon that's in oil or coal that built up from tens of thousands of years of decaying organic matter. I'm not sure I can do the explanation justice in this quick reply, but here's the gist:
CO2 that's emitted from living creatures and natural processes, along with that emanating from the burning of current plants that store it doesn't change the balance much as far as global warming, b/c the capacity of current biota to respirate these gasses tends to balance with the rest of the ecosystem it supports. For example, if we over-utilized a current carbon source, we'd have insufficient food to eat. (We do over-utilize current carbon sources too--by feeding so much of our crops to animals we then eat for appox = qty of protein with none of the fiber and less of the nutrients--but that's another story.) So CO2 and atmospheric temperature affects tend to stay more in check with one-another.
But when we burn ancient carbon, pulled from deep under ground--at least in the large qties as we do now--the amount of CO2 emitted quickly (in geologic terms) supersedes the biosphere/geosphere's capacity to clear it.
The answer is to change our relationship with the stuff in our lives that waste lots of energy. No, not going back to living in caves. But a more decentralized energy grid mostly oriented around photovoltaics (solar) along with other "freebie" energy generation sources that don't muck up the air, diminish human health, nor shift the climate at a rate that kills off the majority of creatures “in the wild” we appreciate as American Frontiersmen.
You are right about something though--the constitution written before the light-bulb existed, doesn’t say congress can decide what kind we ought buy.
1st, carbon isn't a gas. Carbon dioxide, aka CO2, is. I refer to carbon itself because it's the origin of the carbon that's significant to my argument, more than the obvious fact that CO2 is the chief green-house warming gas we're concerned with when we talk about carbon.
If the carbon we're talking about is in the form of cellulose in a tree, that's then chopped down and into logs, that we then burn in a fireplace for heat; that's much different than carbon that's in oil or coal that built up from tens of thousands of years of decaying organic matter. I'm not sure I can do the explanation justice in this quick reply, but here's the gist:
CO2 that's emitted from living creatures and natural processes, along with that emanating from the burning of current plants that store it doesn't change the balance much as far as global warming, b/c the capacity of current biota to respirate these gasses tends to balance with the rest of the ecosystem it supports. For example, if we over-utilized a current carbon source, we'd have insufficient food to eat. (We do over-utilize current carbon sources too--by feeding so much of our crops to animals we then eat for appox = qty of protein with none of the fiber and less of the nutrients--but that's another story.) So CO2 and atmospheric temperature affects tend to stay more in check with one-another.
But when we burn ancient carbon, pulled from deep under ground--at least in the large qties as we do now--the amount of CO2 emitted quickly (in geologic terms) supersedes the biosphere/geosphere's capacity to clear it.
The answer is to change our relationship with the stuff in our lives that waste lots of energy. No, not going back to living in caves. But a more decentralized energy grid mostly oriented around photovoltaics (solar) along with other "freebie" energy generation sources that don't muck up the air, diminish human health, nor shift the climate at a rate that kills off the majority of creatures “in the wild” we appreciate as American Frontiersmen.
You are right about something though--the constitution written before the light-bulb existed, doesn’t say congress can decide what kind we ought buy.
By: bryander
Re: Important Info On Low Energy Light Bulbs
Wow! Talk about missing the forest for the trees! Did this guy get beyond a 7th grade education? His sarcasm isn't warranted, and is in fact quite disgusting when one considers the real issues involved here. Ones that he oughta know before behaving all righteously in front of congress.
Quantities of carbon kept out of the atmosphere with this one simple, inexpensive, technically feasible change, are in the millions-of-tons. That's ton as in 2000 lbs. And in emissions terms, each ton spreads roughly to a hundred high school gymnasiums in cubic feet.
If importing from China bugs you, mr poe, write a bill to support mfg here. If you know how to write. If the micrograms of mercury in these bulbs bugs you, work toward getting funds to better educate the public about proper disposal--and while you're at it, maybe take note that the toxic metals we irresponsibly discard daily in the form of disposable batteries are in quantities several orders of magnitude above this mercury.
And lastly, why do you mock congress? Making it out to be blameworthy for all that's complicated, and therefore by your suggestion also bad. You are congress! Learn to listen, and get along with your own community there in the House. The people you represent surely would prefer that you learn the issues and make sensible choices, rather than behave like a jackass, following some ill-informed suggestions from a few self-serving know-it-alls back home.
Quantities of carbon kept out of the atmosphere with this one simple, inexpensive, technically feasible change, are in the millions-of-tons. That's ton as in 2000 lbs. And in emissions terms, each ton spreads roughly to a hundred high school gymnasiums in cubic feet.
If importing from China bugs you, mr poe, write a bill to support mfg here. If you know how to write. If the micrograms of mercury in these bulbs bugs you, work toward getting funds to better educate the public about proper disposal--and while you're at it, maybe take note that the toxic metals we irresponsibly discard daily in the form of disposable batteries are in quantities several orders of magnitude above this mercury.
And lastly, why do you mock congress? Making it out to be blameworthy for all that's complicated, and therefore by your suggestion also bad. You are congress! Learn to listen, and get along with your own community there in the House. The people you represent surely would prefer that you learn the issues and make sensible choices, rather than behave like a jackass, following some ill-informed suggestions from a few self-serving know-it-alls back home.
By: bryander
Re: Best Of Beaker And Bunsen
seems good, but couldn't tolerate it past first minute--anyone have a version without the weird audio interference?
By: bryander
Re: Does the Perfect Man Exist?
this is like the best ad ever. I'm maybe not the primary target audience, being male and not working in admin. But it would seem to me that it's people in admin (and make office supply/pen-purchase decisions) who are most likely to daydream in such an absurd (though normal) manner.
By: bryander
Re: Global Warming or Global Governance?
Blighty, I suggest you try to ground your assertions.
Just because you've read something written on the internet doesn't mean you've done research. Talk to the geologists studying ice-cores, the botanists and entomologists seeing genetic variance across shifting ecosystems, and the atmospheric chemists--much better equipped than any "filmmaker" to apply fundamental physics principles to the interaction of atmospheric gases with our tens of millions of TONS of emissions spewed into the air every day.
I don't disagree that there are political players who try to manipulate public perception in order to suit their own agendas. But please don't let such often-malevolent behavior among some blind you to the earnest hard work and integrity of others.
Just because you've read something written on the internet doesn't mean you've done research. Talk to the geologists studying ice-cores, the botanists and entomologists seeing genetic variance across shifting ecosystems, and the atmospheric chemists--much better equipped than any "filmmaker" to apply fundamental physics principles to the interaction of atmospheric gases with our tens of millions of TONS of emissions spewed into the air every day.
I don't disagree that there are political players who try to manipulate public perception in order to suit their own agendas. But please don't let such often-malevolent behavior among some blind you to the earnest hard work and integrity of others.
By: bryander
Re: The Evolution of the Cell Phone
very cool! and this is like, what?, 10-20% of the phone models manufactured during this time. 230 million discarded phones per year in just 2 countries! Yee-ikes!
By: bryander
Discrediting a man who earned several degrees rigorously studying early childhood dev't, and who cared deeply about humanity's future... it's disgusting. I personally wasn't a big fan of Fred's show. But his message--Everyone is Special--is true. And fundamental.
The researcher claiming this message impairs an individual's capacity to work hard to accomplish things in life--either he is making some absurd connections, or the fox guy has failed to grasp what he was saying in the research snippet he saw.
These supposed kids who're arguing for A's without doing their homework--? How many kids is this? If teachers are giving into this nonsense, there's your problem. Being able to appreciate everyone's intrinsic value as a person, and their dignity, are essential for achieving a society of mostly happy people, imho. Working toward goals and finding success in life build from it--it's not like anyone (you'd think) would see it as though it's either one or the other!