| Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites. |
| Scott2006 |
Machine Producing Water From Thin AirAn eco machine that is capable of producing drinking water by condensing water from the air and purifying it, will retail at $1200, on sale in the UK in the Spring.Bottled water, sold in over 30bn bottles a year in the USA alone, is an unsustainable way of providing drinking water in the long term, which might help this invention take off. The 30 billion bottles of water cost over $11 billion to produce and cause a huge waste material problem at disposal in land refills. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environ...8/nov/23/water-mill-eco-invention This invention is timely and is needed in many parts of the world. Unfortunately the areas in the world that need it most can't afford it - except in presidential palaces of tin-pot dictators in many cases. I don't think i'll be buying one at the first opportunity - but who knows - in the years to come - we might all be drinking "air-water". |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
The Guardian article explains this
A fine example of how eco-fascist media, of which the Guardian is the most prominent, can be taken in by any scam artist who first chants their mantra. The chances of this becoming as widespread as the microwave, as the makers promise, is on the close order of zero but I am sure they will find a number of idiots to improve their bank balances. I doubt if many of those parts of the world where the tap is an unknown invention will have plentiful supplies of electricity & I cannot see these scammers hoping to sell many copies of this toy in the 3rd world. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rinty |
the flaw is that it most needed in the driest areas, the driest areas have less moisture in the air! | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Holebender |
How many 240 Watt light bulbs do you have in your house? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
Well actually none because I have the low energy ones but I rather doubt if the manufactuers of this scam knew that - what do you think?
If you are saying such bulbs aren't common I suggest you look in any shop selling them. The ones marked 240 W are 240 watts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Holebender |
I think someone needs to learn the difference between a Watt and a Volt.
I guarantee you will have great difficulty finding any 240 Watt light bulbs. I also guarantee that won't stop you arguing on here over the next couple of days that three light bulbs is equivalent to 720 Watts of power, because that's the sort of person you are. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
You are, as normal, wrong Holeinthehead. Common bulbs run from 60 watts to 240. You should check.
I had worked on the assumption that the salesman were making their comparison with 3 of the biggest bulbs - my experience is that this is how salesmen work. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Holebender |
The most common incandescent light bulbs were 100W and 60W, with some 40W and the occasional 150W. I doubt you have ever seen a 240W lightbulb, and I defy you to produce evidence of such a thing. Even if 240W bulbs did exist, why would you assume the report refers to this unusual size rather than the most common 60W or 100W? Why even assume the report refers to incandescent bulbs at all?
As I said earlier...
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
I defy you to produce evidence they don't exist. Indeed I defy you to produce evidence that anything you have said here Holbinder is at least 10,000 times closer to honest than the very highest standard of honesty of which you are capable you [nasty person].
[Edited] |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Gentlemen,
please refrain from referring to each other by such choice epithets as:
Newsreaders, I don't mind, call them what you like: but not fellow participants in the discussion. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Holebender |
Thus speaks the [nasty person] posting under the name "Neil". Just by way of a straw poll, has anyone here (other than those who have lost touch with reality) ever bought, used, or even seen, a 240 Watt lightbulb for domestic use? [Edited] |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Nope. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
The highest I've ever seen was 150w. But 100w or 60w is more usual. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Here you go, all the way up to 10,000 watts if you want.
http://www.bulbtown.com/Bulbs_By_Wattage_s/28.htm |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
IRRELEVANT. The question was
It is quite clear that the larger wattage bulbs on that website are not intended for normal domestic use. I repeat, the highest I've ever seen for normal domestic use was 150w, but 100w or 60w is more usual. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
So you want to decide what "normal domestic use" is?
I don't think so; the website offers its products to members of the public not specialty users. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
So why don't you decide for us: have you ever seen, met or heard of anyone with a 10 zillion watt bulb in their house? Can you envisage any potential circumstance in which a person may have said bulb in their own house? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Glad to do that Sir!
What the article describes is actually a dehumidifier, a device that extracts moisture from the outside air for use in the home, by compressing it and just like an air conditioner, the moisture comes out. The difference is that the air is not circulated back into the house but the moisture is collected. The power consumption on a dehumidifier can run from 200 watts up to 600 watts or more depending on how much moisture you want to collect, how quickly; Look for yourself>http://www.thelitehome.com/dehumidifiers/soleus-dehumidifiers/soleus-dehumidifiers.html |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
By the way the largest domestic machine the Soleis Company makes produces about 8 gallons per day at 600 watts of energy. That is about one-fourth of the water needed for one human adult living in the semi-tropics ( below latitude 30 degrees). So if you have a normal domestic family of four, figure about 100 gallons per day, more or less. In other words 12x600 or something around 7000 watts per day. A little more or less. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
In response to me,
It's not a question of me "deciding" what OUGHT TO BE normal domestic use. It's a factual question about the kind of light bulbs that most folk actually do use in their homes. In response to RFM,
Well, you say you're glad to, but you haven't actualy done it. We were talking about the light bulbs that folk actually use in their homes, and I repeat
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jimbo |
Hi RFM,
surely you err here? Eight gallons (32 pints) per day is about one fourth (128 pints) of the water needed for one human adult living in the semi tropics? How could any human consume so much water? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
I have always wondered why [pirates] are so dim, maybe it is because they are too cheap to buy decent lighting.
Go back to sleep Coul, Neil wins this one hands down. If you want to see a zillon watt light bulb, just buy yourself one of those machines. [Edited] |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Hi Jimbo,
Nice to hear from you again. Actually water consumption includes, cooking, personal hygiene, washing, household use, etc., not just drinking water. The hotter the weather, the greater the water consumption. Actually there are published data about humans water use and even as far north as Chicago it is quite startlingly high. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
In response to me,
In response to RFM,
But RFM did not, in fact, provide any evidence of such high wattage in normal everyday use by the average person.
Why do you choose to bring religion/culture into this? It has got absolutely nothing to do with religion/culture. Of course it's possible that simple POVERTY could have something to do with what lighting myself and other people can afford, in which case, what RFM is expressing would be CLASS PREJUDICE, rather than religious prejudice.
Why? I have expressed no views whatsoever on these machines. Since I have expressed no views whatsoever about them, how can I be said to have "lost" any argument about them? The ONLY view I have expressed in this exchange is about the kind of light bulbs in normal domestic use by most people (not most "rich" people, but MOST PEOPLE).
Personally, I do use some 150w bulbs. But it is a fact that 100w is more usual, and that, in some rooms/lobbies/whatever, folk will use 60w. A simple survey of an average sort of street in an average sort of town would soon establish the truth of this. (No, an upper middle class suburb is not "average".) |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
What is it with you Mr. Coull, are you really that dense?
Here take a good look so you can say you have seen a domestic light bulb rated at 300 watts. Stop with the yatta-yatta about "simple surveys or an average sort of street in an average town" BS. Put up or shut up. http://www.bulbtown.com/SearchResults.asp |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Note that I personally have actually played no part whatsoever in discussion about this machine which is alleged to produce water from thin air. I have expressed no views whatsoever on that. The ONLY way that I became involved was in agreeing with Holebender that I had never bought, used, or even seen, a 240 watt lightbulb for domestic use. And THAT is a statement of fact. I never HAVE bought, used, or even seen such a bulb for domestic use. I stated this simple fact without in any way being offensive to anybody. Unfortunately, somebody completely unknown to me, calling himself RFM, chose, for some obscure reason, presumably from some form of prejudice, to be deliberately offensive. RFM expressed religious/cultural prejudice, and also, more seriously, from my point of view, displayed snobbery, or, to give it a more accurate description, CLASS prejudice. RFM continues to be deliberately and quite unjustifiably offensive:
No, I am not dense. It is a statement of fact that Holebender asked whether anyone here had ever bought, used, or even seen, a 240 Watt lightbulb for domestic use. It is a statement of fact that I have not. That statement is true REGARDLESS of whether you have or not.
Your contempt for ordinary people is noted. It is hardly surprising, given the snobbery and vile class prejudice which you have already displayed. But no, I will not stop stressing the importance of the experience of ordinary working class folk. It is a fact that, in my experience, a 150w bulb is as high as I have encountered, and I believe this to be more generally true of most ordinary working class people. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Your pardon , humbly asked, Mr. Coull,
I was trying to conceal my contempt for you. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Note that I wouldn't know this RFM person from Adam. I know nothing about them, and have nothing against them, and have said nothing to offend them. Despite which
and
and now
Note that this RFM, whoever they are, is admitting reacting, not to what I actually wrote, but from assumptions based on prejudice. Which is a very bad way to conduct a discussion about anything. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Yes. A dehumidifier. Not a lightbulb. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
Those complaining about the size of light bulbs are clearly doing so to avoid acknowledging that this "eco-friendly" dehumidifier is indeed a scam.
If it were 3 x 150 watt light bulbs that would be 11 kw a day (well ok 10.  . Bear in mind that whenever politicians say that a new wind farm is going to produce "enough electricity to power x thousand homes" it turns out that (A) it comes out at about 1.25 kw per household & (B) this is based onthe windmill working at full capacity whereas in fact, being intermittent, they average at 28% capacity.
So the eco-friendly windmills, which we in Scotland subsidise by £1 billion a year would produce about 2/3rds of the electricity to keep this eco-friendly dehumidifier going. Clearly the dehumidifier manufacturers aren't the only people running a scam. Mancuso with your declared desire to ensure that figures are accurate to decimal points you may wish to acknowledge that 10,000 watts is somewhat different from your declared "10 zillion" |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
That claim has about as much relation to reality as your earlier claim that (1) I receive disability benefits, and (2) that i have stated I have a bad back. You are wrong, yet again. I do not have a bad back, I do not receive disability benefits, and I have no interest whatsoever in promoting this alleged miracle machine. The reason I disputed the size of light bulbs in normal domestic use had absolutely nothing at all to do with "to avoid acknowledging that this 'eco-friendly' dehumidifier is indeed a scam". I really don't give a damn one way or the other about this so-called machine for producing water from thin air. My first reaction when I read the post from Scott 2006 about it was that it probably WAS too good to be true. But, although that was my immediate reaction, I wasn't really interested in investigating it further. And I wasn't really interested in getting involved in a discussion about it one way or the other. It just wasn't that important to me. Now, maybe you think that attitude of mine is very irresponsible of me, maybe you think that this SHOULD have been important to me, but, statement of fact, it wasn't. The only way I became involved in this particular discussion at all was that
And I made a statement of fact, namely, that I had never bought, used, or even seen, a 240 watt lightbulb for domestic use. RFM's reaction to my statement of fact was bigoted, class-prejudiced, and beside the point of what I had said. That was the ONLY reason I continued to post. And the only reason I am posting NOW is because of a statement from yourself which has about as much relation to reality as your claim about me being on disability benefits. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Yes I may be bigoted and even class-prejudiced, but I am not dishonest, Mr. Coull.
You actually said: "It is quite clear that the larger wattage bulbs on that website are not intended for normal domestic use." Then you tried to qualify it with some nonsense about an average town and an average household. That just won't do. You said that the lightbulbs on that website were not intended for normal domestic use, not just what you had ever seen, despite the manufacturer's statements that they were so intended. Go back and read your own statements. BTW why on earth you think anybody would be remotely interested in your personal affairs eludes me, and I am not asking for an explanation, I am telling you that this discussion is not about you. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
I would say that statements you have made right here on this Our Scotland forum, in this thread, displayed both bigotry and class prejudice.
Clearly, different people have different ideas of what constitutes honesty.
Well I know for a fact that Neil is, because HE was the one who brought up about "disability benefits" and "bad backs" when a discussion was not going his way. Okay, he was completely wrong, but he was interested. From my point of view, a certain amount of willingness to be straight about one's own experience is a simple matter of honesty. Like I said, clearly, different people have different ideas of what constitutes honesty. Many folk do find personal experience interesting. It is irrelevant that YOU do not. In this particular instance, Holebender specifically asked whether anyone here had ever bought, used, or even seen, a 240 Watt lightbulb for domestic use. Since Holebender was interested in our personal experiences of this, I gave the truthful answer "no". The reason it became relevant to mention simple poverty as a possible context was that YOU suggested being "too cheap to buy decent lighting" as an explanation. The first person to get personal was YOU.
And I'm telling you I don't give a damn whether it is or not, if YOU make personal remarks about me, then it will become about me. But it's YOUR choice............
Maybe I was wrong about that website. To tell the truth, I didn't actually look at it very closely, and I still haven't. For all I know, that website may cater for some weird folk with more money than sense who get some kind of sick kick out of being able to say "I've got a bigger light bulb than you". But I'm not really interested in such strange perversions. For me, the important point is that, so far as most ordinary working class folk are concerned, 150w is the biggest light bulb we have seen, although 100w is more common, with 60w for parts that don't particularly need a bright light. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Speaking of not needing any bright lights, I take it you include yourself? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jimbo |
Hi RFM, my apologies. Since we were talking about a machine that produced drinking water, I guess my mind was on that track. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Hi Jimbo,
Nothing to apologize for. Actually the makers of that machine do not make it clear that it is intended only to produce a few quarts of drinking water per day. That is looking at the size of the thing. But the engineers and physicists have been looking at ways to produce water for over the past 40 years, simply because water is fast becoming a diminishing commodity as the world population has grown. The city of Denver, Colorado, for instance is not presently able to furnish enough water for its residents and the population continues to grow, likewise Los Angeles and Las Vegas. All of the options such as distilling plants, dehumidifiers, desalinization plants all require tremendous amounts of energy. In the past five years a discussion has started among the economists to increase the price of water since its present prices do not reflect anything near cost. It is a problem that has not yet reached crisis, but when it does then and only then will we address it. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
I suspect part of the reason Denver is short of water is that it is very high & it is thus relatively expensive to ship it there. On the other hand there has been, since the 60s, a plan to ship water across Canada, the US west & Mexico which is certainly feasible & would make the world greener. This is, of course, condemned by those alleged greens who are actually Luddites using greenery as a false flag.
For such see http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot....h?q=big+enmgineering+%2B+greening Dave I have already acknowledged that I was wrong to think you were the fool complaining about his disability benefit wasn't as good as it would be in North Korea. That was indeed a different fool. Nonetheless saying
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
As a 10,000 watt light bulb for domestic use does not exist, and a 10 zillion watt light bulb for domestic use does not exist, then the difference between is, well, non-existent. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Now THAT is a personal attack. Suggesting that I'm only here to make personal attacks is itself a personal attack. I have made many genuine contributions to Our Scotland. Take a look at the History forum. The most recent post there is from Risto, congratulating me on "great stuff, Dave!". Yes, it's true I tend to be more interested in things like history than I am in things like this alleged miracle machine. But that doesn't mean I'm only here to make personal attacks. The very first personal attack in this thread came from YOU, when you referred to Holebender as "Hole in the head". As for me, take a look back at my first post. It is a simple, straighforward, reply to a question from Holebender. It contains no personal attack on anybody. Despite me making my points in a civil manner, RFM made a personal attack on me, involving both my cultural background and my social class status :
(The reason that statement involves class prejudice as well as religious bigotry is because RFM makes the rich man's assumption that the only reason folk ever buy cheaper things is because THEY are "cheap".) While later admitting that he had displayed prejudice,
The first personal attack in this thread came from YOU , Neil; later, it was the personal attacks from RFM which prompted personal responses. Also, you can blame RFM for it becoming necessary to mention what you said about disability benefits and bad backs. Despite the fact that I had never mentioned anything which was not a relevant response to HIS personal attacks on me, RFM suggested that nobody would be remotely interested in my personal affairs. He was making the elementary logical mistake of thinking that what was true of himself was true of everybody. I cited two examples to prove him wrong. One, the fact that Holebender had specifically asked people on this forum about their experience of light bulbs in domestic use. Two, the fact that you had shown an interest in my income and in my state of health (even though you got both wrong).
The reason Denver is so short of water is not just because it is high, but also because it is on the wrong side of the Rocky Mountains. If it was a bit further west it might not be so short of water. On the other hand, if it was a bit further west it would have to fight Los Angeles and San Francisco for water. Just as these two cities had to fight with each other over water rights. Conflict over water is not a new thing in the American far west. People have been fighting (and in some cases dying) over water rights in California for a long time. Both Los Angeles and San Francisco were, right from the start, built in places where there was no natural water supply, and they had to get water from elsewhere. Throughout the first half of the Twentieth Century, the water companies were notoriously involved with corrupt politicians and violent gunslingers, for instance, over the Hech Hechy enterprise. More than fifty million people live in California, a state whose thirst can not be quenched. As the shortage of water worsens, things could get wild out west. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
Oh woe, woe is me!
Everybody is picking on me because of my deprived childhood,adulthood and bad breath. No insult goes un-noticed that I can not wrap myself around. No observation is too vague or indefinite that I can not stretch it to fit me. Woe, woe, woe is me! Grow up for Goodness sake. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Neil complained about "personal attacks".
So, you're saying Neil was WRONG to complain about personal attacks? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
Dave said
Still nothing on topic then 
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Not on the topic of this alleged miracle machine, no. Let's face it, since it looks like absolutely NOBODY here on this Our Scotland forum has argued that it can live up to the claims made for it, that particular subject appears to be going nowhere. However, it is a mistake to think that any post which does not stick strictly to the original topic heading must therefore be a personal attack. There is another possibility, that genuine discussion can take a direction not covered by the narrow confines of the original topic heading, but, nevertheless, developing quite naturally out of that. I think the discussion about what was, and was not, normal domestic use of light bulbs came into that category. Also, a wider category developing quite naturally out of the original topic would be the problem of growing global water shortages. And I have indeed posted something relevant to the more general topic of growing global water shortages. To remind you of what that was, here it is again:
Now, of course California and the far west of the USA is not the only place with a serious water problem. We could see conflict over water in the Middle East, in Africa, in the Indian sub-continent, etc. Nevertheless, California and the American far west do have a history of conflict over water (I have a couple of books on this history) and there is little doubt the region is facing a very serious problem. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
A problem they can solve any time the eco-fascists let them or the US stands up to them. Ditto most of the rest of the world. See my previous link.
The point being that all the eco-fascists catastrophe promises have turned out to be lies (I have asked in many places for them to name one which turned out to be true without success) & all their Luddite solutions to be scams (as you admit absolutely nobody here is suggesting this isn't). |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
In his very first post on this thread, Neil ranted against "eco-fascists". When Holebender asked him a perfectly reasonable question, Neil described him as "Hole In The Head". Neil then followed that up with a post describing Holebender as a lying Nazi. In his latest post, regarding water shortages,
Oh dear, the poor oppressed USA. The world would be such a better place if only powerful American corporations were allowed to do whatever they damn well pleased without anybody questioning their motives or the possible consequences of their actions. . Strangely enough, Californian water companies in league with corrupt politicians and gangs of violent gunslingers were saying much the same thing a hundred years ago. The more it changes, the more it stays the same........... Do you know the origin of the word "bigot"? It comes from the Spanish word for beard. Back in the days of the Spanish Inquisition, and of the Conquistadores who conquered and enslaved South and Central America, there were a rather a lot of fanatics around with sharp pointy beards on jutting jaws. The Spaniards referred to such men as "bigots". So, from just being the Spanish word for beard, a bigot became a man who had a habit of clenching his jaw and sticking his chin out in a rather aggressive manner. So far as some Spaniards were concerned, to begin with at least, it could even be a fairly complimentary term, it could mean a man of firm convictions. But gradually the meaning changed to develop more negative overtones. By the time the word was adopted into the English language, its connotations were entirely negative. But even in its original Spanish (metaphorical) meaning, a bigot was a man for whom things were black and white, with no shades of grey. Like the Spanish Inquisition. As far as they were concerned, you were either with them, or you could go to Hell. The forces with which they battled might call themselves by different names, Jews, Muslims, Protestants of many different varieties, American natives who believed in their own heathen gods, but, to the true bigot, these differences didn't really matter: what they all had in common was a refusal to accept The One And Only Truth. Their many and varied beliefs didn't matter: they were unbelievers, that was the only thing that mattered. You are a bit like that, Neil. You see things in black and white, with never any room for any shades of grey. You think you have found The One And Only Truth, and anybody who disagrees with you, or even anybody who just thinks there is room for reasonable doubt, must be an "eco-fascist". It doesn't matter that folk who disagree with you, or even who just think there is room for reasonable doubt, are in actual fact all very different from each other. In your black and white world, with no shades of grey, they are all "eco-fascists". Such blinkered fanaticism makes rational discussion well-nigh impossible. Which is a pity. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Neil |
What a stupid post (also the beards bit gets a bit off topic even for you). If you have read in depth what i have writen here or on my blog you will know perfectly well that I have often metnioned things which are ethical grey areas.
However some things aren't. Some things are matters of fact, such as the engineering capabilities of this, or windfarms, or the inability of the eco-fascists to name a single one of their global catastrophes which have failed to happen. There is enormous room for disagreement on matters of opinion & I have never objected to anybody doing so, unlike many here. There is no room for inventing or modifying facts to fit prejudices. "What are the facts? Again and again and again-- what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what "the stars foretell," avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable "verdict of history" -- what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!" If you consider that to be bigoted then that says more about you than about me. PS Fascist was also originally considered a nice thing to be by fascists so I guess you can't object to me talking (correctly) about being dictated to by eco-fascists. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
From the online etymology dictionary:
bigot Look up bigot at Dictionary.com 1598, from M.Fr. bigot, from O.Fr., supposedly a derogatory name for Normans, the old theory (not universally accepted) being that it springs from their frequent use of O.E. oath bi God. Plausible, since the Eng. were known as goddamns in Joan of Arc's France, and during World War I Americans serving in France were said to be known as les sommobiches (see also son of a b***h). But the earliest Fr. use of the word (12c.) is as the name of a people apparently in southern Gaul. The earliest Eng. sense is of "religious hypocrite," especially a female one, and may be influenced by beguine. Sense extended 1687 to other than religious opinions. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bigot |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
una barba?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
In Spanish: un fanatico! (bigot) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Pués, sí. Pero no tiene nada que ver con barba, ni con bigote. My (paper) etymological dictionary says:
Which agrees pretty closely with RFM. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Well, no, actually, come to think of it, Neil did NOT write that. The clue is that he used quotation marks. And notice all of those verbs of command, those ORDERS that are being given - Shun! Ignore! Get!......Neil is quoting from his guru, or one of his gurus. The fact that the advice seems to be perfectly reasonable doesn't alter the fact that Neil is a follower. The apostle Paul's advice in the New Testament "prove all things; hold fast to that which is true" also seems quite reasonable. But following a guru, even one who can sometimes seem to make sense, is not reasonable.
It is difficult to read what you write on the Our Scotland forum "in depth" because there is precious little depth to plumb. Every topic on which you post is sure to , sooner or later, contain a rant against "eco-fascists". And it is quite clear that THAT phrase is a quote from somebody or other, from the guru, or one of the gurus, whom you follow. In this particular thread, you mentioned "eco-fascists" in your very first post. Like other True Believers, you take it for granted that the in-jargon of your sect is a clearly defined term which everybody understands. Well, no, it isn't. It's just your way, or rather, your guru's way, of saying what other bigots such as the Spanish Inquisition have said before you, "everybody that is not with us is against us".
I never read blogs. The only things I know about you are what you post here, and I know that, in every topic on which you have posted here on the Our Scotland forum, you have sooner or later dismissed those who disagree with you, or who just aren't as True Believers as you, as eco-fascists, or lying Nazis, etc etc. When I was a very, very young laddie, somebody told me that Catholics believed that pigs could see the wind. Not just see that they could see the EFFECTS of the wind, such as leaves rustling, or branches swaying, but that pigs could actually see the movement of air itself. I thought that Catholics must be awful superstitious to believe such nonsense. But even if I could, somehow, have proved that pigs do NOT see the wind, that wouldn't have proved the Catholic church wrong, because, as I later discovered, this wasn't actually one of their central dogmas. But I grew out of such misapprehensions. You, on the other hand, appear to be under the delusion that, in some peculiar way, discrediting an alleged miracle machine, namely, this water-from-thin-air-thingy, discredits EVERYTHING of which you disapprove. Well, no , it doesn't. Okay, so this implausible machine doesn't do what was claimed for it. No big deal.
You're lumping things together that don't necessarily go together. Regarding this particular miracle machine, my first reaction was one of scepticism. Regarding windfarms, they aren't miraculous either, but they might be quite useful in some localities, as a supplementary source of energy, and not in others You refer to the origins of the word "fascist". Yes, it was intended by its originators to convey a positive message. The italian fascist movement took it's name from the "fasces", the symbol of strength-through-unity, of ancient Rome. It was taken for granted by the fascists that, of course, to have unity, you had to have a Leader, and everybody had to follow the Leader. Which brings us back to the quote you made from your guru. You are a follower, I'm not. Your labelling of all the great multitude of different viewpoints which is not identical to the one which you follow as "eco-fascist" is the mark of the True Believer, the "everybody-who-is-not-with-us-is-against-us" syndrome.
Eh? Calm down, dear, it's only a discussion. You are saying that "the eco-fascists" are unable to name a single one of their global catastrophes which has FAILED to happen? In other words, you are saying that every one of the global catastrophes predicted by "eco-fascists" HAS happened??????????!!!!!!!!!!! I wouldn't go as far as that! Only some of them have come to pass.......... One thing that has certainly come to pass is climate change. When I was on an environmental science course at Dundee University in 1994 to 1995, we were told by our lecturers that "global warming" wouldn't just mean that things got pleasantly warmer for us in the chilly north east of Scotland. We were told that the only things that were certain were that the human-induced changes would have an effect, and that the exact forms this effect would take could vary for different parts of the planet. In fact, so far as us in Scotland were concerned, it was even possible that melting of the Greenland icecap could affect the North Atlantic Current/Gulf Stream system, and we might even experience WORSE weather here, not pleasant sunny days, as a result. We were told that there would probably be sea level rise and that this would cause increased flooding in some parts of the world. Have you noticed what has been happening to places like New Orleans and Bangla Desh? Now, I am not one to just accept what I am told, I have an instinctive distrust of anybody in "authority", but I reckon quite a lot of what we were told, fourteen years ago, was likely to happen in the future, has indeed been coming true. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
My mistake! It just goes to prove, (1) my memory is getting worse in my old age, and (2) anyway, I shouldn't have taken what I was told by some teacher at face value. What my Spanish teacher (a native Spanish speaker) many years ago actually claimed was that the English word "bigot" came from the Spanish word for "moustache" (bigote) and from the word for "having a big moustache" (bigotudo). |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
I was only splitting hairs (!) anyway. An odd idiom with moustaches in Spanish is to describe something you like as de los bigotes. Can't think of any English approximation of that, other than Bertie Wooster saying something is 'Top Hat' |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
So what have I been watching all these years ? 
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| RFM |
"It's just your way, or rather, your guru's way, of saying what other bigots such as the Spanish Inquisition have said before you, "everybody that is not with us is against us".
Yes, indeed. a quote from a bigot: 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against us is on our part. (MARK 9) King James Version, no less. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dave Coull |
On the subject of facial hair, I should point out, that Spanish teacher of mine didn't have a moustache. In fact, she had rather a pleasant face to look at. Which may be why I was so ready to accept what she said about bigotes and bigots at face value. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Human, all too human. 
|
||||||||||||||||||||||