I disapprove how WWF agitators sometimes invade the personal privacy of unsuspecting passer-byes, urging them to pay from 5 to over 50 Eu a month (for an year). The skill they often employ in evoking dereliction and blameworthiness into the minds of the people they talk to, turning their indifference towards the animal kingdom into self-blame, granted that they don't receive any funds from those people, is also well known and criticized by some.
This is very evident in the case with the Green peace Organisation (tm), which I'm almost convinced, serves a darker purpose in modern society as it wrongfully and unjustly makes use of the outdated "Global Warming / Climate Change" - propaganda as its chief source of income steering public opinion through the same machinations used by other and the already mentioned green organisations whilst its confirmed contribution remains somewhat unverified,
which brings the question - could they not be 100% right ?
While I agree with your sentiments, may I present Exhibit A:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Touche!!!
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
not even close....let me explain
*a better world without pollution, animals and clean environment that isn't a health hazard to the people is one thing (here the WWF win they are doing nothing wrong)
but
*forcibly rubbing in a fabricated guilt, based on a widely accepted theory with =this may shock you= NO, significant scientific proof .
*fuelling a whole new "industry" (ecology) worth Mlrds. of $, based on those vague claims, which just launders money in the background without producing any evident result
*lying to the whole world, by falsifying data (remember wiki-leaks) .... we that's too much.
tell me than proud "Green Peace"/Green Parties' - minion:
=why didn't USA sign the Kyoto protocol? (but imposed it all over the rest of the world)
=why hasn't it got NOTABLY HOTTER (that's what they predicted for the early 2000-s)?
=why did they start calling it "Climate Change" now?
and this:
=Is there anyone that was actually credited for discovering "Global Warming", received a Noble Prise maybe, or did it just appear overnight?
-tell me what did they managed to achieve in terms of supporting the energy independence --- not much
you know how this all sounds like :
THE CHURCH OF CLIMATE CHANGE and THE DOOM PROPHECY
-we don't need another dogmatic belief, thank you very much
now lets do a quick recap of some of the astrophysical evidence against:
-the Sun dictates the climate in the whole Solar System, it displays a cyclic activity in different periods of time ranging from 100 000, 2000, 200, 22, to 11 year cycles. They are closely observed and studied by scientist. There are proven methods using polar ice drill probes , rock and soil samples and other which allow collecting of data about the Earth's climate hundreds of thousands of years ago to even millions (by interpreting galactic radiation isotopes and other methods)(basically the same technology for dating archaeological finds). The more short term climate changes (2000 years) are observed as well with even better accuracy (now having not only indirect but also direct solar data - even from ancient observations, sunspot count...and later with technology: magnetic images, temp ect.. ). The cyclic activity of the sun is evident (with cycles overlapping and interacting) and it is proven that it correlates and has the leading influence over the Earth's climate. =FACT=.
in short (notice how in mass media no one ever talks about the role of the sun) :
-climate in the different eras was very different, with temperatures in the last 1000 years being significantly colder and HOTTER (Greenland, Eric the Red Beard- ring any bells?)
-Climate in the whole Solar system is dictated by the sun if the ice caps on Earth are melting , well guess what the ice caps on Mars are melting as well....with the rather same dynamic by that, leaving place for doubt about the so called Anthropogenic Global Warming
-ozone layer holes are a scam too...in years of increased solar activity (end of the 90-s early 10-s) the ozone layer is REdistributed towards lower geographical widths exposing the Earth's north and south poles....this behaviour of ozone was found in the 1850-s [read it: ozone holes were found in the 1850-s]...(long before there were any air conditioners) , these ozone fluctuations have everything to do with how ozone is created and redistributed and the solar activity , I wont go into detail, go educate yourselves
GO ASK AN ASTROPHYSICIST OR AN ASTRONOMER IF YOU THINK THAT I SAID SOMETHING WRONG
mengo_ said:
now lets do a quick recap of some of the astrophysical evidence against:
-the Sun dictates the climate in the whole Solar System, it displays a cyclic activity in different periods of time ranging from 100 000, 2000, 200, 22, to 11 year cycles. They are closely observed and studied by scientist. There are proven methods using polar ice drill probes , rock and soil samples and other which allow collecting of data about the Earth's climate hundreds of thousands of years ago to even millions (by interpreting galactic radiation isotopes and other methods)(basically the same technology for dating archaeological finds). The more short term climate changes (2000 years) are observed as well with even better accuracy (now having not only indirect but also direct solar data - even from ancient observations, sunspot count...and later with technology: magnetic images, temp ect.. ). The cyclic activity of the sun is evident (with cycles overlapping and interacting) and it is proven that it correlates and has the leading influence over the Earth's climate. =FACT=.
in short (notice how in mass media no one ever talks about the role of the sun) :
-climate in the different eras was very different, with temperatures in the last 1000 years being significantly colder and HOTTER (Greenland, Eric the Red Beard- ring any bells?)
-Climate in the whole Solar system is dictated by the sun if the ice caps on Earth are melting , well guess what the ice caps on Mars are melting as well....with the rather same dynamic by that, leaving place for doubt about the so called Anthropogenic Global Warming
-ozone layer holes are a scam too...in years of increased solar activity (end of the 90-s early 10-s) the ozone layer is REdistributed towards lower geographical widths exposing the Earth's north and south poles....this behaviour of ozone was found in the 1850-s [read it: ozone holes were found in the 1850-s]...(long before there were any air conditioners) , these ozone fluctuations have everything to do with how ozone is created and redistributed and the solar activity , I wont go into detail, go educate yourselves
GO ASK AN ASTROPHYSICIST OR AN ASTRONOMER IF YOU THINK THAT I SAID SOMETHING WRONG
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As an astrophysicist and an astronomer, I'd like to correct you using this analogy.
Imagine you're snug in bed (the Earth), and you have central heating (the Sun) and blankets (CO2). The thermostat on the CH is wonky making the room temperature rise and drop on it's own accord (fluctuating solar activity).
Currently the CH is set to 20C, you pull a blanket on you and your temperature goes up higher than 20C, you pull another blanket on you, and it goes up even higher.
Now the CH hasn't changed, and the blankets aren't providing any extra heat, they're just trapping the heat in making you hotter than you would be without it.
The thermostat goes on the blink and sets itself to 25C, if you were just lying on the bed you'd get up to 25C, but you've got 3 blankets on you, so even though the CH is at 25C, you're hotter than that and start to feel unwell.
Then the thermostat drops itself down to 10C, the room cools as do you. Without those blankets you'd drop to 10C and feel quite cold, but because you have them your temperature is higher than it would be with just the CH, so it feels quite balmy.
Do you understand now that CO2 does affect the temperature and with it the climate?
The media and other luddites may not understand what science is telling them, and hear "CO2 is warming the plannet" when actually what is being said is "CO2 is making it hotter than it should be"
Currently the 11 year cycle is broken (which may explain the longer period that the Tories were in power followed by the longer than usual period that Labour remained in power) in that there is less activity than we would expect.
This is likely to lead to harsher winters which given the UK's inability to cope with a few feet of snow is what we scientists call a "very bad thing"
This is why it is not as hot as predicted due to the predictions using the 11 year solar cycle which you have by citing given credence to.
Using the current solar activity shows that the current global temperature is still higher than it would be at lower greenhouse gas levels (not just CO2 remember).
The US didn't sign up to the Kyoto agreement because the luddites in power at the time were funded by the fossil fuel industries, and rather than realising that a lot of money and jobs can be made by diversifying into genuine "green" technologies they went for the quick buck. I'm amazed you don't know this already. Incidently, due to the UK signing up to the Kyoto agreement, I can use much cheaper fuel without having to pay duty.
The Ozone layer was discovered in 1913, that's a good 60 years after the 1850s by the way.
The ice caps on Mars are mostly CO2, not frozen water, and they melt as Mars enters summer, just as on the Earth the ice caps melt as it enters summer, it just takes more energy to convert ice into water than it does to sublimate CO2 into gas. Come the Martian winter, the caps will be back. This happens every year.
The term climate change aids the explaination to luddites as to what actually is the effect of global warming, the sort of people who turn round and say "it's cold today therefore global warming must be a hoax"
TL;DR my friend. I said I agree with your sentiments (WWF, UN, etc. are ineffectual at best, corrupt and at worst speeding up the process), hence I stopped donating to these fine organizations.
But my original point, and the image I posted still stands. They are protecting our biodiversity, and they are protecting our environment (ever breathed clean air, really clean air outside the city?), they are creating a better future where our lives aren't dictated by the price of commodities, or by some resource that is very much limited in its nature (I'm talking about our reliance on fossil fuels).
The key here is sustainability. Hence, do we work towards a future where our needs for energy is sated by sustainable means, or do we keep burning dinosaurs and wonder where did the smog came from?
While I'm not sure about your procreation goals, I do wish to have children, and I do wish that when I hand over my world to them, I can tell them "Daddy made a difference" when it comes to giving them a better future.
Wiser men than I have said:
We borrow the world from our children
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and I believe in that. I'm a steward of the world, and I don't want to look back on my life and say I didn't do squat to make it a better place.
Now, to answer some of your queries directly:
1. Global warming is the bull$#[email protected]+ that the media spews. The correct term is Climate Change. Read up.
2. IPCC is a fraud, and so is their Chairman. I don't believe that we have enough data to conclusively say that humans are "causing a significant change in the global temperature" but I believe that humans are causing significant changes to the environment. Over-fishing, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertification are among the things that we are doing wrong, as well as the observable thinning of the ozone layer. While nothing can be conclusively said to be of human origin, it does seem quite a coincidence for it to happen at the exact same time as when human population growth is exponential, no?
3. USA is a major fraud. The Kyoto Protocol is not followed by the USA because their industry players said that to adhere to the protocol will cause them to lose their "global competitiveness" therefore their leaders did not sign it. Also, why compare to people who are clearly doing it wrong? Why aspire to be the worst?
4. It won't get observably hotter fast, but in the winter months, it will get observably colder, or at least more expensive when you can't pay for your heating bills. Luckily I stay in perpetual warmth, although I will miss my air-conditioner.
Overall, I'd say that your facts are weak, and based on little research, merely what you have personally observed. Without a PhD or a directly related degree, I'd say that the internet+Google+wikipedia will pwn your @$$ pretty easily. Stop using it for facebook and use it to learn for whatever sake. Also, XDA is a geek site, not Fark.com, so do expect some form of intelligence in the answers, and expect to be owned (especially on my turf) when you said something wrong, and say it stupidly (I really meant that and will gladly invite an infraction for saying it).
thanks for the replies,
it's always hard to try and fight the well established ways of thinking even , if not the hardest in the scientific world where not only all previous knowledge is (supposed) to be backed with proof; and everything you say undergoes rigorous checks.
I tried to be critical about everything I wrote, but you have right, xaccers, I see some of it is unclear, but I still stand behind everything I said even that about the thinner ozone distribution over higher geographical widths, mainly Northern Europe where the hole is even bigger due to the specific air/sea currents being discovered sometime in the 19 th century in Norway (Ok not as early as the 50-s maybe, but still) ...or was it Denmark -
--I'll have to check again , thing is I'm doing medicine now so haven't opened my astrophysics notebooks in years, and this thing about the "global warming" being a rather popular science matter wasn't that much referred to in the curriculum. It was in generally regarded as a hoax by my professor...
..got distracted there,
1913 (lets stick to what wikipedia says) - hole in the ozone -- well that's still long before the air conditioner era (not forgetting here what they told us back then how quickly they are supposed to ruin the ozone layer)
I personally know one of the students of the guy who got cited by NASA about his predictions for the 23th (and 24th ??) solar cycle and described it very thoroughly giving its correct form (another maximum peak at the end and its supposed anomalies) and his predictions came true .
ice caps on Mars - I wasn't talking about polar caps on Mars melting because of the current Mars-summer, (that's just plain stupid, of course they would melt in the summer), I was talking that if you compare the ice caps dynamics in the last 30 years (they have good series of telescopic observations for download in the Nasa websites) and you compensate for latency , amount of change and so on... well they pretty much correlate to the general solar activity and Earth's middle temperatures (probably Earth's glaciers as well) , -look for this, there are many articles in the internet
Venus has a thicker atmosphere comprised of all sorts of "green house" gases - which aren't constant like blankets at all they are in continuous dynamic (although no plants and no industry on Venus) and again are dictated by the sun - it's difficult for me to go into detail right now
-I know I'm nothing but a layman in the field but I was fortunate to have met a lot of smart people, whose point of view I'm trying to defend
Lets look at the Wiki article, and what it says about 1913, and you'll see that the Ozone layer was discovered then, not the hole.
We've been using ozone depleting chemicals in commercial and domestic refigeration since the early 20th century, while the depletion was detected in the late 70s.
So even referring to Wiki you are unfortunately reading it incorrectly.
Mars has such a low gravity that the escape velocity is low enough for vast amounts of CO2 to escape into space on the solar wind, so during the summer this is what happens. Nothing is producing more CO2 in large enough quantities to replenish that which has been lost.
This has been going on for millions of years hence why Mars doesn't have much of an atmosphere.
It's also happening with gasses in our atmosphere too, but there's no need to start practicing holding your breath just yet
I'm very glad you've brought up Venus as it demonstrates my blanket analogy perfectly.
Let us look at Mercury, which is closer to the Sun and therefore one would expect to be the hottest planet in the solar system.
Except it isn't. Due to the additional blankets (CO2) on Venus, it is actually hotter than Mercury despite being a third of an AU further away from the Sun.
Also, due to the blanket effect of the CO2, Venus' temperature us rathe runiform and stable, demonstrating how CO2 traps heat, while Mercury ranges from -170C to 350C
So thank you for helping demonstrate how greenhouse gasses can raise the temperature of a planet.
In case you haven't understood, without the greenhouse gasses, being further away from the Sun, Venus would be colder than Mercury, but because it has greenhouse gasses trapping the heat it is actually hotter than it should be.
If you're wondering where the CO2 came from as there's no industry on Venus, then I'll have to explain about the super volcanoes on it's surface which make Mt Everest look like a mole hill (ok I exaggerate for dramatic effect, but not by much, they are seriously huge), and they spew out CO2.
Of course, who's to say there wasn't life on Venus once, the evidence does suggest it once had water oceans...
The CO2 produced from volcanoes on Earth is important, but cannot be blamed for the additional increase in CO2 levels we are experiencing.
There is a theory that during the Earth's history, back when the Sun was a lot less active and therefore cooler, it became nearly completely covered in ice, the so called snowball earth theory. With the temperature that low, precipitation all but stopped, so there was no "washing" of our atmosphere. This lead to a build up of CO2 spewed from volcanoes now long dormant, which raised the Earths temperature higher than it would have been before, thawing the planet and enabling life to continue.
Sakai is quite right in that if we manage to find cleaner ways of doing what we like then how is that a bad thing?
You only have to look at a city from a distance on a hot day to see the smog of pollution that us humans are producing.
We won't destroy the world, but we can quite easily make it inhospitable to humans, I'd rather we don't do that.
Without world governments taking it seriously rather than trying to make a quick buck at ultimately everyone's expense there isn't much direct effect one or two people can have, or for instance a small nation like the UK, but by making the change, following Sweden (I believe) and their plan to be oil free, can put pressure on other countries to follow suit.
As for your teacher telling you that global warming is a hoax, that shows a servere lack of professionalism. My Geography teacher couldn't seperate her own creationist beliefs when marking some of my course work (I did a 50 page essay on the geology and geography of the lands around where remains of our evolutionary ancesters had been found) and gave me 2 out of 20 as a grade. It was then that I realised what her problem was, as before I had found it stranged she denied oil was the remains of zooplankton and algae, instead stating it was "stored solar energy"
She was what we call in the industry a "very bad teacher" and looked like a Gummy bear.
I'm sorry that we have forsaken the civilised tone of the discourse but mentioning the creationists as a counterargument was hardly appropriate, it is just insulting...
who said anything that the Martian atmosphere plays a role in the matter, I was talking about ice caps melting under the pure influence of the solar activity.
(NASA doesn't cite creationists as far as I'm aware)
exactly what you are saying: constant HUGE volcanic activity - but stable temperature spectres nevertheless ? - showing how greenhouse gases are still regulated by natural phenomena
I will write you again in a couple of days about the ozone layer discovery , maybe back what i said with direct links. I'm not ready yet .
I'm not against ecology; just the opposite, if you would look through my discontent with falsifying science for political gain, you would see that I don't want to live to see the ecology movement as a whole being discredited in the near future after these theories have been cast away.
This thread is insulting
Sent from my NS (no it's NOT SNS or GNS)
mengo_ said:
I'm sorry that we have forsaken the civilised tone of the discourse but mentioning the creationists as a counterargument was hardly appropriate, it is just insulting...
who said anything that the Martian atmosphere plays a role in the matter, I was talking about ice caps melting under the pure influence of the solar activity.
exactly what you are saying: constant HUGE volcanic activity - but stable temperature spectres nevertheless ? - showing how greenhouse gases are still regulated by natural phenomena
I will write you again in a couple of days about the ozone layer discovery , maybe back what i said with direct links. I'm not ready yet .
I'm not against ecology; just the opposite, if you would look through my discontent with falsifying science for political gain, you would see that I don't want to live to see the ecology movement as a whole being discredited in the near future after these theories have been cast away.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry you weren't able to grasp the point I was making by mentioning my geography teacher.
It is wrong for a teacher, especially a science teacher, to put forward their opinion as fact, or be unable to seperate their own opinions from good science.
It doesn't matter if she believed australopithecus africanus was a chimp like creature unrelated to man, she should have put her beliefs aside and marked according to the quality of the science and research put in front of her.
Likewise your teacher should have given you the tools to understand global warming and climate change rather than opining that it is a hoax.
The Martian ice caps are the Martian atmosphere! What do you think they are made of?
It's frozen CO2 which is pretty much all that is left of the Martian atmosphere, the rest has evaporated off into space.
Mars is tectonically inert, it has very little internal heating, it's got low gravity which as I've explained is why the atmosphere is able to escape.
As I've said, during the Martian summer, the poles recieve more solar engery and the CO2 sublimates back into it's gasious form. A gas is made up of excited particles rushing around bouncing into each other, and many will have enough energy to escape Mars' gravitational hold, evaporating off into space.
You comment about volcanoes and greenhouse gasses on Venus is somewhat confusing.
Let me try to explain a few things so I can see if we understand each other.
Venus is very tectonically active (unlike Mars, and the Earth is somewhere in between), which releases lots of CO2 into it's atmosphere. It's oceans boiled away and there is no precipitation (rain) to clean the atmosphere so unlike on Earth, there is no Carbon cycle.
Consiquently the levels of CO2 built and built and built to their bone crushing levels of today.
The volcanoes are not heating Venus significantly, although it would be a bit warmer by a volcano than away from it obviously. The CO2 isn't heating Venus either. The Sun provides the heat, but this is the important bit which you appear to be having a spot of difficulty understanding, the CO2 traps the heat, meaning that Venus gets hotter than it should be, considerably hotter than it should be, hot enough to melt lead.
With every eruption of CO2 into the atmosphere, the amount at which Venus is hotter than it should be increases (in case you're thinking along the lines that Venus' temperature is constant despite all that CO2).
Now if you were to remove all the CO2 from Venus' atmosphere, it's temperature would drop to what it should be. Got it?
On the Earth, we have rain, and life, which gives us a Carbon cycle.
CO2 released into the atmosphere by animal and plant respiration (yes, plants produce CO2, isn't science amazing?), burning fossil fuels, volvanic activity etc is reabsorbed by the oceans (making them acidic) and plant photosynthesis, and the soil, and concrete, and various other processes (such as dead organic matter that's been buried).
Now if we just burnt a sustainable amount of young trees for our energy, replanting as we chop them down, then there wouldn't be much of a problem.
The CO2 that we were releasing would be the CO2 absorbed by the trees as they grew (of course they release the oxygen leaving just carbon which we then oxydise -burn- putting the oxygen back forming the CO2 produced).
The carbon cycle is pretty balanced for the levels of CO2 we're supposed to have.
Now if you go back millions of years to when that zooplankton was growing before it became crude oil, it's absorbing CO2. Then it died, became buried and turned into crude oil. Basically think of crude oil as stored CO2.
So imagine what would happen to the balanced carbon cycle if we went back millions of years, sucked up a load of CO2 and then released it today.
The cycle gets overloaded, trees may absorb more and grow bigger, but they'll die and release the CO2 back unless we bury them, and if we burn them then they release the extra CO2 even quicker. The oceans absorb more CO2, forming carbolic acid which kills coral and other primary food sources (we're seeing this already). The atmosphere traps more heat, which raises the global temperature above what it should be altering weather patterns. Precipitation increases and there are more floods destroying crops and people (look at Bangladesh), the temperature of the oceans increases killing more coral and primary food sources (many reefs have been bleached through high temperatures).
We're seeing many of these effects already, and that's with only a slight increase in temperatures above what they should be.
Hopefully the Sun's activity will remain depressed and we can play catch up for a little while before it's too late.
Phew, thank God this thread didn't descend into madness. Let's try to keep it civilized, alright?
The fact remains that I have worked and stayed in rural, semi-rural, and urban areas so I can say with certainty that on a weekday morning, the urban area has the worse smog. How observable does it have to be for us before we change our lifestyles for the better? In my country, we were encouraged to drive to boost the automotive industry. Here, our public transportation is so unreliable that I can't trust it to get me to work on time. On top of that, I have certain responsibilities that require me to drive. So I drive.
But I was really excited when they announced that an MRT system is going to be built up in my area. This will make my morning commute easier and less damaging to the environment.
When I go to a grocery store and just buy a few small items, I always tell the cashier to keep the plastic bags. I simply don't need them and consciously try to reduce my plastic footprint.
Similarly, when I buy good and equipment, I buy quality stuff that'll last longer, and I try not to buy synthetic materials.
All these add up to one thing; resources aren't infinite and we need conserve what we can.
Climate change might be controversial and polarising (believe me, I had made fun of it) but that does not mean it's not happening, and it doesn't mean that we (as humans) are completely innocent. We are, as a species, altering entire ecosystems with our action (or inaction) and we need to change that. I'm sure as a medical student, you are familiar with the adage:
First, seek to do no harm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And well, frankly, let's hope that in 30 years time, my kids will not look at Kung Fu Panda the same way I'd look at Kung Fu Triceratops.
I wish supermarkets over here changed to paper bags like in the US so they can be easily recycled again, although our plastic bags are now very biodegradable (as I found out when stored something in a bag for 6 months and the bag just crumbled into plastic flakes when I tried to pick it up).
I also wish it was easier to get hold of waste vegetable oil for my car, I can find no suppliers in the area I live in.
SVO is better than diesel, but not as environmentally friendly as WVO.
xaccers said:
I wish supermarkets over here changed to paper bags like in the US so they can be easily recycled again, although our plastic bags are now very biodegradable (as I found out when stored something in a bag for 6 months and the bag just crumbled into plastic flakes when I tried to pick it up).
I also wish it was easier to get hold of waste vegetable oil for my car, I can find no suppliers in the area I live in.
SVO is better than diesel, but not as environmentally friendly as WVO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tesco and Jusco started using bio-degradable plastic bags about a year ago. While I hate the fact that I can't use it for long, it does help the environment.
WVO is kinda hard to refine, hence it isn't really viable.
sakai4eva said:
Tesco and Jusco started using bio-degradable plastic bags about a year ago. While I hate the fact that I can't use it for long, it does help the environment.
WVO is kinda hard to refine, hence it isn't really viable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just need do heat (to remove water/acid) and filter it for my cars. I wouldn't make biodiesel, its dangerous and uses some nasty chemicals, and isn't as good for my engines.
In our city a few years back we were recycling 38% of our rubbish, which for the UK is one of the highest rates.
Hopefully it is going up, our council helps with weekly collections, free bags for recycleables, free wheelie bin for garden waste, free kitchen box for food waste, and free box for glass.
There are loads of recycling collection bins around, and most litter bins have a seperate section for recycleables.
About 80% of my household waste goes for recycling.
Any items taken to the tip that could be resold are transferred to charity shops so not only do they reduce the amount going to landfill, they are helping charities make money.
xaccers said:
I just need do heat (to remove water/acid) and filter it for my cars. I wouldn't make biodiesel, its dangerous and uses some nasty chemicals, and isn't as good for my engines.
In our city a few years back we were recycling 38% of our rubbish, which for the UK is one of the highest rates.
Hopefully it is going up, our council helps with weekly collections, free bags for recycleables, free wheelie bin for garden waste, free kitchen box for food waste, and free box for glass.
There are loads of recycling collection bins around, and most litter bins have a seperate section for recycleables.
About 80% of my household waste goes for recycling.
Any items taken to the tip that could be resold are transferred to charity shops so not only do they reduce the amount going to landfill, they are helping charities make money.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I understand, Taipei's municipality enforces a mandatory seperation of garbage into respective recyclable bags. I'd think that it's a great initiative, but with the "clever" people in my country...
I really try to keep from creating waste and garbage. Most of my boxes from gadgets and gears are re-used or re-purposed, and I have just gave away my old phone to a youth in my church.
And of course, charities do enjoy having donations. Seems like killing two birds with one stone, doesn't it?
Indeed there really is no excuse to not seperate when the council make it so easy.
The concern over making it mandatory over here is that people would get fined because neighbours don't bother seperating and dump their mixed waste in other's bins.
We've already had some councils mis-using anti terror laws to spy on bins and fine owners because it was so full the lid wasn't able to close (the council did have its knuckles wrapped for that though).
At the moment I have my fiancee's late grandmother's clothes in the boot of my car ready to go to a charity this weekend.
It just makes sense to me to reuse (like you do with boxes) or repair items.
Yup. Reducing consumption and reducing waste is a great way to save the earth. I have a tendency to NEVER waste food, and I'm steadily trying to balance hospitality and saving from wastage
The name change to this thread IS NOT an improvement. Please refrain from name calling (even if it's a charity, company ect) I find it highly offensive. You are entitled to your opinion but, I feel the thread title takes it too far.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA Premium App
...changed name anyway , was too off-topic
You have apparently heard this already, however making diversions is hard, greatly hard. The best diversions mix programming, sound blueprint and workmanship into a smoothie of soul-melting significance.
We could represent a significant time span with respect to why people revere the gameplay of Candy Crush Saga, why the music places yoACu in a zen state or how the sound effects impact you to need to swipe just by and by. Today we will turn down the music and quickly end our swiping fingers as we look at the craftsmanship and the authorities behind Candy Crush Saga.
What is Candy Crush Saga workmanship?
You know Candy Crush Saga when you see it, isn't that so? You could probably tell from looking redirection logo alone! Regardless, where does that look begin from? Who are the overall public that make the look of Candy Crush Saga?
We talked with Game Artists: Sandra da Cruz Martins, Tove Bergvist and Senior Game Artists, Ronya Grimheim and Ilias Patlis to find what impacts Candy To squash look like Candy Crush.
This break squad of workmanship rulers have worn down Candy Crush Saga in most of its unmistakable stages, from a beguiling negligible propelled tyke to a satisfied five-year-old.
Ilias Patlis - Senior Game Artist, flicking through a sketchbook
Ilias Patlis, who has been working at King since 2012, remembers the inspirations driving the well known style. "Treat Crush has had a couple of effects, past any sensible add up to indicate since it has past through various hands now. Workmanship Deco, Paper theater and old table diversions and to a great degree old toons and blueprints."
The diversion wears its inspirations on its sleeves. The pins and the activitys of the characters are capricious ways the craftsmanship gather bits of knowledge at some unnoticeable puppet pro, jostling the characters and desserts for your redirection.
In any case, impacts don't charm themselves on to your screen... in any case. It takes a channel, a specialist to change inspiration into a thing. The request by then pushes toward getting to be, what makes a skilled worker?
Thought character plots
When you look at a Color Bomb, you aren't just looking more compelling substances on the planet, you are looking coffee, unlimited talks a warmed conflict or two and many, various late nights!
Each one of the a substantial number of pixels that make up Candy Crush Saga was sketched out by a skilled worker each with their own particular considerations, experiences and fascinating understanding of the world. In any case, how is this undercover creature, the skilled worker, made?
The need to be an expert starts in front of timetable for the duration of regular day to day existence, and the stories of our skilled worker's beginnings all have focus comparable qualities. Sandra da Cruz Martins had "constantly been enchanted with Disney and Pixar Movies," as was Ronya Grinheim, who as a tyke "appreciated Disney" and worshiped "drawing child's shows."
Senior Artist, Ilias Patlis, while not a massive Disney fan, still esteemed "everything from He-Man, Turtles, Thundercats and even My Little Pony." It's nothing surprising that he moreover, "contributed a lot of vitality drawing these effects step by step."
Sandra da Cruz Martins - Game Artist, getting her specialty on.
It doesn't stun anybody that toons feature so seriously as inspiration to the, by then energetic, identities of our authorities. A brief take a gander at Candy Crush Saga would make that unmistakable.
Since no workmanship is made in a vacuum, Influences and inspiration are so dire to the inventive system. To the readied eye, these effects are as absolutely self-evident! Sugary treat Crush diversion specialist, Tove Bergvist, sees that "if you know them [the artists] you can see experts singular style transmit through and consistently consider who made a particular piece."
So how did the larger part of our pros get into redirection workmanship?
Craftsmanship isn't just an occupation. For masters, the need to make is almost as strong as the need to eat. Specialists will make whether they are paid or not.
Tove Bergvist - Game Artist
Take Tove, for example, "I was for a very long time been tingling to achieve something related to craftsmanship. I exceptionally should have been a painter and basically do my own specific masterpiece." However, having the ability to dress and empower yourself can frequently help the innovative technique, which is the reason Tove, "attempted to be sharp about it and achieve something that was more straightforward to live from, and turned out I to a great degree appreciated it."
Sandra "should have been an ocean life researcher!" nonetheless she felt tension going into workmanship propelled by a distrustful dread of transforming into an "independent expert, making present day arrangements and shapes, which was not for me." Her family at last convinced her into embarking to a University open night that focused on human articulations and PC sciences.
Ronya Grimheim - Senior Game Artist
Much like Ronya, who "after perhaps 3-4 years playing World of Warcraft," had the epiphany that "some individual needs to work making this? Who is making these astonishing experiences?" Eventually, she ended up at the University of Skövde, where she would hone her propelled craftsmanship aptitudes.
Ilias' way is correspondingly rad, he was filling in as a "Twofold and wellness mentor" when a client in an activity focus saw his work and recommend he apply to work at King. I get a kick out of the opportunity to imagine he arrived at the King work environments by hammering an auto through a window and barrel moving into the gathering, like a director. I theorize he got the plan and wore an OK suit, in any case we can simply dream.
Expert's elucidation of Ilias' first day at King.
Where do pros draw their mysterious imperativeness from?
Pros are, amusingly enough, routinely roused by various experts. Tove "is pushed by friends and accomplices. Not just style clever, but instead additional by their musings and endeavors and innovativeness. Having a significant measure of expert around is amazing. Taking a gander at each other's work and nerding out about workmanship stuff."
You'll in like manner be shocked to understand that experts are in a heavenly and old riddle society that couple of people can see. Consider the stage 9 3/4 in Harry Potter or the glasses of truth in They Live… simply less disastrous. Some call it the titanic past, the omniscient eye, others call it electronic informal communication.
Ilias understands that "internet organizing supports you with such a combination of heavenliness reliably" in truth there is so much inspiration that it can be "more essential to log off as opposed to hunting down more inspiration!"
From sketchbook to screen, the innovative methodology in full
Sandra has been particularly moved by made by the specialist Phil Hansen. He breathed life into her to "altogether consider of the case and recognize craftsmanship for workmanship, not for the measure of rendering hours of the normal thought imaginative manifestations you see without ceasing for even a moment."
How does craftsmanship stay new?
Like the all inclusive community who make it, the forte of Candy has changed and grown reliably. Inconspicuous changes to the desserts, the characters and establishments have improved the preoccupation, keeping it looking new and empowering.
It happens so unnoticeably and after some time that you almost don't witness it, however to look at the preoccupation from 2012 and from 2017 one beside the other, you'll see an immense refinement.
Specialists moreover need to remain empowered, it's what powers inspiration, which we have learnt is at the focal point of a skilled worker.
For Sandra, that enthusiasm starts from nostalgic workmanship, "old Disney films yet what's more portrayals in books I used to examine a ton. For example, there is a notable Dutch craftsman called Anton Pieck and his work is astonishing, reliably 'brings me back'. I revere his penmanship, the calmed shades and the exceptional line workmanship he used to do." Whereas for Ilias, it's "looking through people's sketchbooks."
Like anything inventive, Candy Crush Saga, isn't just an entertainment, its weddings, it's birthday occasions, it's your most adored toon as a youngster. It's the total experiences of a get-together of talented people whose characters have been revolved around a common target; making a fun difficulty.
Pics, or it didn't happen!