XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

What a way to go! :-D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0lf4hIQOJg

Great music too!

--
Enjoy your day!
It may be your last! ;-)
David

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 13/08/2023 08:37, David Brooks wrote:

What a way to go!  :-D

Did 'they' know how they were going?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0lf4hIQOJg

I have never seen the fascination re how we deal with the leftover husk
of human beings and a very select subset of animal species (typically
some of those we arbitrarily label as 'pets')?

And look at all the extra pollution generated using a 500hp rig to
deliver a 100kg load?

Surely the 'person' ceases to exist when they die so I'm not sure why
you need their remains involved if you feel the need to 'let go' or this
'pay your respects' thing people talk of?

How much of it is habit, further pushed by the funeral businesses when
the next_of_kin are often at their most vulnerable?

Imagine you weren't aware of what you are 'supposed' to do when someone
you know / like / love dies (and you become responsible for), what would
you do? How easy would it for you to do what you / they wanted, rather
that what is typically done (in your culture)?

And if you actually cared about the environment (and we all should be if
we don't want even more unnecessary deaths), wouldn't a 'sky burial' be
better?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_burial

Especially for all those who think us breeding, and killing animals is
part of any 'circle of life'?

Great music too!

Highly subjective opinion of course. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 13/08/2023 09:47, T i m wrote:

On 13/08/2023 08:37, David Brooks wrote:

What a way to go!  :-D

Did 'they' know how they were going?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0lf4hIQOJg

I have never seen the fascination re how we deal with the leftover husk
of human beings and a very select subset of animal species (typically
some of those we arbitrarily label as 'pets')?

And look at all the extra pollution generated using a 500hp rig to
deliver a 100kg load?

Surely the 'person' ceases to exist when they die so I'm not sure why
you need their remains involved if you feel the need to 'let go' or this
'pay your respects' thing people talk of?

How much of it is habit, further pushed by the funeral businesses when
the next_of_kin are often at their most vulnerable?

Imagine you weren't aware of what you are 'supposed' to do when someone
you know / like / love dies (and you become responsible for), what would
you do? How easy would it for you to do what you / they wanted, rather
that what is typically done (in your culture)?

And if you actually cared about the environment (and we all should be if
we don't want even more unnecessary deaths), wouldn't a 'sky burial' be better?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_burial

Especially for all those who think us breeding, and killing animals is
part of any 'circle of life'?

Great music too!

Highly subjective opinion of course. ;-)

Your post says a great deal about YOU, Tim! <rolls eyes>

Perhaps you'd rather go up in flames, like this?

Maui Wildfire - https://www.gofundme.com/f/5auw5q-maui-wildfire-relief-fund

Maybe you don't even know of Patrick Wardle, who lives there. I'm glad
he survived. https://objective-see.org/about.html

--
David

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 13/08/2023 10:06, David Brooks wrote:

<snip>

Your post says a great deal about YOU, Tim! <rolls eyes>

That's good then, that means I'm putting myself across efficiently.

Hopefully it shows you I'm not just a follower, that I try to consider everything I do and then do what feels right / sensible for me, for
society and for others and the environment, rather than just doing stuff because that's what always has been done?

I call it having an 'open mind', and being a 'free thinker'?

Nothing worse in my view like having something as fantastic as a mind
and keeping it closed to new ideas?

Perhaps you'd rather go up in flames,

When I'm gone I really CGAF how my corpse is disposed of and I certainly wouldn't anyone to want to be there when that happens?

Cheers, T i m

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 09:47:16 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk> wrote:

Surely the 'person' ceases to exist when they die so I'm not sure why
you need their remains involved if you feel the need to 'let go' or this
'pay your respects' thing people talk of?

I know of a Canadian dude who runs a popular Youtube channel. About a year ago, he semi-jokingly suggested that dead people should be frozen solid, then a vertical hole should be drilled in the dirt and the frozen body placed in it. Fill it with dirt and plant a tree on top. The decaying body will fertilize the tree. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.

Well, the backlash was swift and harsh, to the point where he took the video down in just a few hours. I guess people are sensitive about what should happen to Granny when she dies.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 14/08/2023 03:01, Kelly Phillips wrote:

On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 09:47:16 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk> wrote:

Surely the 'person' ceases to exist when they die so I'm not sure why
you need their remains involved if you feel the need to 'let go' or this
'pay your respects' thing people talk of?

I know of a Canadian dude who runs a popular Youtube channel. About a year ago,
he semi-jokingly suggested that dead people should be frozen solid, then a vertical hole should be drilled in the dirt and the frozen body placed in it. Fill it with dirt and plant a tree on top.

Excellent.

The decaying body will fertilize the
tree.

Yup.

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.

Yup. I think it's already fairly common for people to do similar with
the persons (or 'a persons' <weg>) ashes, so they have somewhere nominal
to go if they want to talk to the person / pet ... and as you say it may
add some nutrients.

Well, the backlash was swift and harsh, to the point where he took the video down in just a few hours.

'Nowt as queer as folk' as they say here in some places.

I guess people are sensitive about what should happen
to Granny when she dies.

And I wonder how much of it is down to social / peer pressure?

When my Dad died our daughter went to the funeral place with my Mum and
sister to act as a moderator, in case they tried to 'up-sell' any of the paraphernalia. I believe they did, a bit, recommending a body box with
'better' handles or some such. Knowing any of it was going to be burned
(single use) or left to rot in the ground would have not pleased Dad as
he was a good carpenter and kept offcuts of any decent timber to use on
smaller jobs etc.

I didn't go to my Dads funeral as I didn't need nor want my last
memories of him being in a box being lowered into a hole in the ground
or fed into a furnace.

It can be difficult trying to do what's right for you when all the
sheeple can only consider / do what all the other sheeple insist is what
we / they / you should do, but if you communicate your position clearly
and DGAF what the other sheeple think / say ... ;-)

My Dad 'went' the moment he had a heart attack half way though his
pudding at home and even though we are only round the corner, the
paramedics had finished by the time we got there. Again, my Mrs went and
kissed him goodbye while he was laying on the floor in the lounge, I
didn't need that memory locked in my head for ever.

And I still refer to any things like tools as being Dads, (even though
they are now considered mine) because he bought them and I've only got
them because he won't be using them any more.

Cheers, T i m

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 13/08/2023 10:06, David Brooks wrote:

<snip>

Perhaps you'd rather go up in flames, like this?

Maui Wildfire - https://www.gofundme.com/f/5auw5q-maui-wildfire-relief-fund

I was watching some of that on the news and of course it's terrible.

However, let's say this climate crisis is man made (and would it matter
if it wasn't, we still should be doing all we can to mitigate it), do
you expect all 'men' (people) to be surprised / compassionate when
things that are predicted (and have been for 30+ years) then happen?

It's like the London ULEZ expansion scheme. Some people are panicking
*now* because it's going to come in at the end of the month but a
neighbour sold us his old non-compliant car two+ years ago because they announced this is what is going to happen back then?

How much food is grown on Maui or how much needs to be shipped in from
outside. How much pollution is created by people travelling to visit the
place just for fun? Are all Maui residents crofters or vegan?

Do they live there because they were born there or because it's 'a nice
place to live', even though doing so doesn't have a particularly good
carbon footprint?

It seems as with many things 'man' get's involved in, the 'Big fire',
industry is just as bad as 'Big Oil', 'Big tobacco', and 'Big Animal Ag'
where they are making fortunes whilst putting peoples lives at risk. In
the case of 'Big fire' it's the investment in equipment to fight the
fires when they happen, rather than investing much less money in
preventing the fires in the first place, often in the winter by clearing
fire breaks and managing forests with that in mind, rather than pure profit.

Maybe you don't even know of Patrick Wardle, who lives there.

I don't.

I'm glad
he survived. https://objective-see.org/about.html

I'm less bothered about the people, many of whom were party to bringing
this upon themselves (by their lifestyle choices, ecological inaction or
apathy re what their governments say they should spend their tax dollars
on) and often have options re escape, be it by road, sea or air. Not the
same offered to millions of *innocent* animals (wildlife, livestock and
pets) who have burned to death or worse, suffer bad burns with little
hope of any medical treatment.

"You reap what you sow" ... and “The only thing necessary for the
triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

Cheers, T i m

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 10:12:26 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk>
wrote:

Yup. I think it's already fairly common for people to do similar with
the persons (or 'a persons' <weg>) ashes, so they have somewhere nominal
to go if they want to talk to the person / pet ... and as you say it may
add some nutrients.

My late wife never decided what to do with the ashes of 2 dogs and a
cat (she didn't want to bury them in our back yard since there's
obviously no guarantee that some family member would always live
here). These 'caskets' are about 4-5" round so could have easily been
slipped in beside her had I remembered.

(Right now they're only stored in her cabinet next to our bed with a
strip of masking tape on each with the critter's name - we do have
plenty of photos of each so it's not as emotional as it might seem)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:39:54 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk>
wrote:

I'm less bothered about the people, many of whom were party to bringing
this upon themselves (by their lifestyle choices, ecological inaction or >apathy re what their governments say they should spend their tax dollars
on) and often have options re escape, be it by road, sea or air. Not the
same offered to millions of *innocent* animals (wildlife, livestock and
pets) who have burned to death or worse, suffer bad burns with little
hope of any medical treatment.

"You reap what you sow" ... and �The only thing necessary for the
triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing�.

Perhaps but why does it matter when the world allows China and India
to go on producing and exporting coal powered plants? Cutting those
would help the climate far more than my entire country (Canada) all
committing suicide would - and while I appreciate the various climate
change conferences (Kyoto etc) I am highly skeptical than any
"solution" that doesn't involve almost total shuttering of coal fired
plants - including Chinese and Indian plants - has any hope of
rectifying the situation.

I'm not a "denier" but I do deny that any solution that doesn't
involve the Chinese and Indians changing their ways massively with
respect to coal has a hope in hell of being effective.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 2024-01-08, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:39:54 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk>
wrote:

I'm less bothered about the people, many of whom were party to bringing >>this upon themselves (by their lifestyle choices, ecological inaction or >>apathy re what their governments say they should spend their tax dollars >>on) and often have options re escape, be it by road, sea or air. Not the >>same offered to millions of *innocent* animals (wildlife, livestock and >>pets) who have burned to death or worse, suffer bad burns with little
hope of any medical treatment.

"You reap what you sow" ... and “The only thing necessary for the
triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

Perhaps but why does it matter when the world allows China and India
to go on producing and exporting coal powered plants? Cutting those
would help the climate far more than my entire country (Canada) all committing suicide would - and while I appreciate the various climate
change conferences (Kyoto etc) I am highly skeptical than any
"solution" that doesn't involve almost total shuttering of coal fired
plants - including Chinese and Indian plants - has any hope of
rectifying the situation.

I'm not a "denier" but I do deny that any solution that doesn't
involve the Chinese and Indians changing their ways massively with
respect to coal has a hope in hell of being effective.

China India and other countries are not buying into the green energy scam because they realize that
military power and supremacy is based upon fossil fuels. Ask the Germans what happened it in WW2.
So while the USA destroys itself going green, our adversaries are producing useful power plants as
fast as they can.
The USA are idiots.

--
Charlie Glock
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms"
- Thomas Jefferson 1776

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

On 2024-01-09, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:

On Jan 8, 2024 at 6:09:43 PM MST, "Charlie Glock" wrote
<r11nN.139023$Wp_8.125954@fx17.iad>:

On 2024-01-08, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:39:54 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk>
wrote:

I'm less bothered about the people, many of whom were party to bringing >>>> this upon themselves (by their lifestyle choices, ecological inaction or >>>> apathy re what their governments say they should spend their tax dollars >>>> on) and often have options re escape, be it by road, sea or air. Not the >>>> same offered to millions of *innocent* animals (wildlife, livestock and >>>> pets) who have burned to death or worse, suffer bad burns with little
hope of any medical treatment.

"You reap what you sow" ... and “The only thing necessary for the
triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

Perhaps but why does it matter when the world allows China and India
to go on producing and exporting coal powered plants? Cutting those
would help the climate far more than my entire country (Canada) all
committing suicide would - and while I appreciate the various climate
change conferences (Kyoto etc) I am highly skeptical than any
"solution" that doesn't involve almost total shuttering of coal fired
plants - including Chinese and Indian plants - has any hope of
rectifying the situation.

I'm not a "denier" but I do deny that any solution that doesn't
involve the Chinese and Indians changing their ways massively with
respect to coal has a hope in hell of being effective.

China India and other countries are not buying into the green energy scam
because they realize that
military power and supremacy is based upon fossil fuels.

If we make the planet uninhabitable what are you going to have power over?

Climate change has been going on since the beginning of time. As others have stated, what about the
little ice age?
Mankind cannot control climate change.

Ask the Germans what happened it in WW2.
So while the USA destroys itself going green, our adversaries are producing >> useful power plants as
fast as they can.
The USA are idiots.

We should be leaders in green energy.

Why?
And sacrifice our military power ?
When our adversaries are not doing this, why should we?
You sound like a libby.




--
Charlie Glock
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms"
- Thomas Jefferson 1776

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: uk.comp.sys.mac, alt.computer.workshop

On 08/01/2024 18:21, The Horny Goat wrote:

I'm not a "denier" but I do deny that any solution that doesn't
involve the Chinese and Indians changing their ways massively with
respect to coal has a hope in hell of being effective.

China and India consumes less (per capita) than Europeans and
North Americans. The reason people think China and India are the main
polluter is because their population is large and also they are producing everything for the world. They have got factories to produce
everything. When Americans and Europeans build their own factories and
start producing everything for their own use then China and India's
emission rate would fall drastically. The only solution is to reduce global population by 30% starting with Europe and Americas.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> news:L81nN.136230$Ama9.105880@fx12.iad
Tue, 09 Jan 2024 01:17:31 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On Jan 8, 2024 at 6:09:43�\u20ac�PM MST, "Charlie Glock" wrote <r11nN.139023$Wp_8.125954@fx17.iad>:

China India and other countries are not buying into the green energy
scam because they realize that
military power and supremacy is based upon fossil fuels.

If we make the planet uninhabitable what are you going to have power
over?

I suspect you're entirely missing his point...

Ask the Germans what happened it in WW2.
So while the USA destroys itself going green, our adversaries are
producing useful power plants as
fast as they can.
The USA are idiots.

We should be leaders in green energy.

I'm sure to regret this...

What do you think green energy is, Snit? Is this a subject you actually know something about, or is this going to turn into the same thing as the thread where David mistook you as being a guru? Are you going to try bsing first,
and doing a bit of research later? Or, will you try to research first if you know nothing about this first, and then BS to fill in the blanks? It's you,
BS is going to come into play at some point. I'm just asking for an approx
ETA.




--
My entire life can be summed up in one sentence...
"Well, that didn't fucking go as planned."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Charlie Glock wrote:

China India and other countries are not buying into the green energy scam

There is no scam, and China is leading into going green https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/29/china-wind-solar-power-global-renewable-energy-leader

-jw-

--

And now for something completely different...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

Am 09.01.24 um 02:44 schrieb Charlie Glock:

On 2024-01-09, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:

We should be leaders in green energy.

Why?
And sacrifice our military power ?
When our adversaries are not doing this, why should we?
You sound like a libby.

And you sound like your Nazi-friend Don the Trump.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

Am 09.01.24 um 02:09 schrieb Charlie Glock:

On 2024-01-08, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:39:54 +0100, T i m <individual@spaced.me.uk>
wrote:

I'm less bothered about the people, many of whom were party to bringing
this upon themselves (by their lifestyle choices, ecological inaction or >>> apathy re what their governments say they should spend their tax dollars >>> on) and often have options re escape, be it by road, sea or air. Not the >>> same offered to millions of *innocent* animals (wildlife, livestock and
pets) who have burned to death or worse, suffer bad burns with little
hope of any medical treatment.

"You reap what you sow" ... and “The only thing necessary for the
triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

Perhaps but why does it matter when the world allows China and India
to go on producing and exporting coal powered plants? Cutting those
would help the climate far more than my entire country (Canada) all
committing suicide would - and while I appreciate the various climate
change conferences (Kyoto etc) I am highly skeptical than any
"solution" that doesn't involve almost total shuttering of coal fired
plants - including Chinese and Indian plants - has any hope of
rectifying the situation.

I'm not a "denier" but I do deny that any solution that doesn't
involve the Chinese and Indians changing their ways massively with
respect to coal has a hope in hell of being effective.

China India and other countries are not buying into the green energy scam because they realize that
military power and supremacy is based upon fossil fuels. Ask the Germans what happened it in WW2.
So while the USA destroys itself going green, our adversaries are producing useful power plants as
fast as they can.
The USA are idiots.

I'll get a Glock, a Berretta or a SIG Sauer to straighten you, Idiot.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

Snit <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> news:6h7nN.172925$7sbb.131814@fx16.iad Tue,
09 Jan 2024 08:16:02 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> wrote:

Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> news:L81nN.136230$Ama9.105880@fx12.iad
Tue, 09 Jan 2024 01:17:31 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On Jan 8, 2024 at 6:09:43â\u20acŻPM MST, "Charlie Glock" wrote
<r11nN.139023$Wp_8.125954@fx17.iad>:

China India and other countries are not buying into the green energy
scam because they realize that
military power and supremacy is based upon fossil fuels.

If we make the planet uninhabitable what are you going to have power
over?

I suspect you're entirely missing his point...

You failed to answer my question.

No, I didn't. Your question showed a lack of understanding of the original question - which is why I wrote what I did...

Ask the Germans what happened it in WW2.
So while the USA destroys itself going green, our adversaries are
producing useful power plants as
fast as they can.
The USA are idiots.

We should be leaders in green energy.

I'm sure to regret this...

No doubt you have many regrets.

Heh. I've lived life some and I haven't been an Angel.

What do you think green energy is, Snit?

Common usage.

Umm. That isn't an answer to my question. So, i'll try again.
When someone discusses green energy, what specifically, do you understand
them to be discussing?
In other words, what do you specifically think that green energy means?

It's my having to ask these follow up questions as you go out of your way to
be snarky that caused me to write what I did about regretting asking you. I predicted I would. :) You claim to want to talk tech, you want the
'fighting' to be over, but you continue to go out of your way to write
snarky and condescending replies - when you have nothing of value to add to what you're responding to with the snark. Case in point, I comment that I'm sure to regret asking you what you think green energy means and is. I wasn't being snarky, but your response was. And, it wasn't necessary.


--
My entire life can be summed up in one sentence...
"Well, that didn't fucking go as planned."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.computer.workshop, uk.comp.sys.mac

Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> news:2BLnN.137999$Ama9.131126@fx12.iad
Thu, 11 Jan 2024 06:07:58 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On Jan 10, 2024 at 10:04:53�\u20ac�PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote <XnsB0F6D3DD5E4HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

[snip]

And you still refuse. You want to move forward without actually having a discussion. The question is clear:

I'm not really surprised at this point that you don't comprehend that I did provide an answer already.

If we make the planet uninhabitable what are you going to
have power over?

Snit, I wasn't asked that question by you. Charlie was:
Message-ID: <L81nN.136230$Ama9.105880@fx12.iad> http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=170571475600

You have no answer.

The question wasn't addressed to me. My interest in your post was very specific. I wanted to know what you meant by the statement that we should be leaders in green energy. Specifically, I wanted to know what you think green energy actually is. It's painfully obvious that you wrote a common buzzword
but that you don't actually have a clue what green energy is. Google could
have helped you try and fake it, though. Some, atleast.

Your question has nothing to do with me, or anything I asked you:
Message-ID: <XnsB0F41AE9EB737HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=170571479100

Ask the Germans what happened it in WW2.
So while the USA destroys itself going green, our adversaries are
producing useful power plants as
fast as they can.
The USA are idiots.

We should be leaders in green energy.

I'm sure to regret this...

What do you think green energy is, Snit? Is this a subject you actually know something about, or is this going to turn into the same thing as the thread where David mistook you as being a guru? Are you going to try bsing first,
and doing a bit of research later? Or, will you try to research first if you know nothing about this first, and then BS to fill in the blanks? It's you,
BS is going to come into play at some point. I'm just asking for an approx
ETA.
***

What do you think green energy is, Snit?

Common usage.

Umm. That isn't an answer to my question.

I use the term in the common way. Nothing special.

Hmm. If you're going to invite discussion on a subject as you have; it would
be a smart thing to actually have some knowledge of the subject, wouldn't it?

Common usage as sparkies would discuss it? Common as city planners would discuss it? Common as end users who don't really even know what it is would
use it? A lay person uses terms without knowing WTF they're actually talking about. Is that what you're doing here? I think you're repeating a buzzword you've heard a lot. I think if you could answer my question, you would have done so; if nothing else but to show me and everyone else that you aren't
the idiot you think I tried to make you out as being by asking. Yea snit, I know you think in such a childish way. I'm kicking myself in the ass for not catching onto it much earlier.

So, i'll try again.
When someone discusses green energy, what specifically, do you
understand them to be discussing?

Again: common usage. Nothing special.

Again: that is in no possible way a valid answer to my question

Not going down your rabbit hole.

It's not my rabbit hole. You're the one who stated that
Message-ID: <L81nN.136230$Ama9.105880@fx12.iad> http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=170571475600
We should be leaders in green energy.

Not interested in the slightest.

If you weren't interested in the subject, why did you suggest we should be leaders in green energy? Did you lose interest because I asked you to
explain what you think green energy is? Concerned that you don't actually
know and I might point that out to everyone? Cluebyfour: I don't need to
point it out, you already have.

I get that will bother you.

Why would catching you attempting to pass yourself off as more knowledgeable than you actually are bother me? It's hardly the first time you've talked
out of turn and been called out for it. It's not even the first time I've
done that to you. Hell, it's becoming a normal thing with you.

but protecting your ego is not my job.

LOL! What in the hell does my ego have to do with what you think green
energy is or isn't and why you think we should be leaders in it?

I am not attacking or mocking you, I am merely refusing to play your game.

ROFLMFAO! Snit, you crack me up dude. I wasn't inviting you to play any
games. I was asking you to clarify what you meant by the term green energy. It's painfully obvious that you were writing something you've heard many
times, but, have no actual knowledge or understanding of. So funny. and you actually think you can hide this by trying to change the subject to it being
my ego, or my rabbit or, or, heh, my game? :)

Snit, dude, nobody is going for this bullshit anymore. I don't even think Aardvark is still virgin to you at this point, dude.



--
My entire life can be summed up in one sentence...
"Well, that didn't fucking go as planned."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)