Funny (political, religious) pictures
- Thread starter strawman
- Start date
GasBandit
Staff member
Well, good thing your sense of smell is so much more accurate then research and things.
Also, even if those numbers are off, it's pretty clear that if you actually care about birds you'd be going after cats 1st.[DOUBLEPOST=1502397144,1502397044][/DOUBLEPOST]
WON'T YOU THINK OF THE BIRDS?
I mean really, do you really want them to die from blunt trauma now instead of from habitat loss later?
This is why people serious about renewables don't put all their eggs in one basket, so to speak, and deploy complementary solutions. This is also why alternate means of storing energy are being developed beyond batteries, such as what they've done in the Canary Islands.
--Patrick
The main point of the picture is that most solutions right now are basically "incomplete" and don't get you very (if any) distance ahead if you're going for "I want reliable power, that's renewable, and cheap." And we haven't even gotten into the "interestingness" that is how dirty producing batteries can be. Total lifetime, etc.
PatrThom, some of the storage technologies you mention are interesting (pumped water storage for instance) but all suffer from the "energy conversion" problem, in that many aren't that efficient, or hide other costs. Pumped Storage Hydro is one of the best at 70-80% (that's the numbers on wiki, decently cited IMO). According to another wiki article, Li-Ion batteries are 80-90%, but of course you have a lot going into the costs of MAKING those. But if you go down that chart, you see why the "hydrogen economy" is somewhat of a scam, just due to low efficiency of conversion.
Currently renewable prices are liking accounting for the costs of nuclear without budgeting for storage of waste. They are hiding their "true costs" that make them stable enough for grid power at high percentages. I'm not saying don't do it, I'm saying it's having LOTS of side-effects and costs which are swept under the rug because they're "green" technologies. That's the core problem I was pointing out with the original image. Bird deaths is only one of the problems.
Or coal while ignoring the disposal of fly ash. Current power generation is accomplished by coal, natural gas, oil, and a little nuclear, and all of them have some sort of "hidden cost" that the cartoon fails to mention.
"Greenwashing" is entirely a thing and unfortunately has become a marketing tool, much like "natural" and "fat-/sugar-free." Unfortunately the only real antidote is educating the populace, which will probably prove more difficult than constructing the towers or batteries.
In Ye Olden Days, a town would have its own relatively small generator (for streetlights and such) that would be powered by steam (at an efficiency of maybe 7%). These newer technologies (even WITH their caveats) afford us the opportunity to move back to a similarly decentralized model, but at significantly higher efficiencies. I 100% support this transition, even if it means the death of the older, hyper-centralized methods.
--Patrick
Last edited:
figmentPez
Staff member
Someone forgot how preachy the show got near the end.
Of course it did, it had already lasted longer than the actual war at that time.
Someone forgot how preachy the show got near the end.
I suppose that depends on whether or not you think shooting your ideological opponents is hilarious.
I don't think you got the joke.
It's just a slight ideological disagreement about the worthiness of certain ethnic groups of people existing... nothing to get worked up about!
What's even funnier is that those where tiki torches...
That's not even what I was saying, but of course, you already knew that.
Wolfenstein teaches us that, if there's one group of ppl it's ok to shoot, it's nazis....
Wolfenstein is indeed pretty badass, but I like to take a page from my grandfather. He actually fought Nazis back in the day, and they were trying to kill him too. He once captured five Germans in a bunker, alone. I asked him why he didn't shoot them, because they very easily could have killed him, being as he was outnumbered 5 to 1. He simply said, "I didn't want to kill anyone". He stayed that way through the war, and ended up getting two purple hearts for his trouble from Germans who didn't quite adhere to that particular philosophy. My point being, I don't like that increasing tendency towards violence of people you disagree with, for whatever the reason. I always figured if my Grandfather could handle it in one of the bloodiest wars of human history, so can I. I don't like alt-right rhetoric, and I believe they should be fought where the confines of the law allows--but not with bricks in the face. I'm also not a huge fan of Antifa's propensity to burn and maim either. I think society as a whole is getting far too comfortable with the idea that the time for debate is over, and the time to bash someone's face in is now.
Of course they are. What, you think half those people have even heard of kerosene, much less know where to get it, or how it applies to torches? If it doesn't come from the Walmart garden center, then it's some weird British-talk for flashlight.
That's a nice story, but i'm pretty sure you grandpa didn't much object to the Nuremberg executions.
I mean, there's a difference between conscripts and volunteers to an ideology that promoted genocide.
...
Also, society has always been very comfortable with bashing peoples faces in... see: all of history.
As for debate... what is there to debate with literal nazis?
...
Anyway, my original intent was to point out that your statement kind of trivializes the ethos of national socialism...[DOUBLEPOST=1502580483,1502580400][/DOUBLEPOST]
But i though they'd like british talk coz it's european, and not some other alien, ethnic culture like that of the people of the Pacific.
I don't know that, and neither do you. He didn't actually like to talk about his experiences, as do most people who have actually seen combat.
Maybe, not that you'd have time to figure that out on the battlefield.
What are you arguing here? That we, as a society shouldn't try to be better than those before us? Aren't you a progressive? Isn't that supposed to be a core belief?
Unless he was some sort of general, or secretary, i doubt he had any experience with the trials at Nuremberg, after the war.
Which is not an issue when they're not conscripts, but attending a rally in support of nazism.
Just pointing out it's not a new thing, as you seemed to imply. You're only more uncomfortable now because you noticed it better.
Is it just a temporary one, though?
No, I've been told it'll really be the final solution this time.
In that case, it may even go full-on Cultural Revolution.
Guess he can Nazi anymore out of the one eye.
figmentPez
Staff member
figmentPez
Staff member
