halloween

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

And you base your claim on scepticalscience.com being biased because... they are citing scientific research.  But I guess when you're cornered and your claims fall apart this is a last resort. Impeach the source without providing any proof.

Anyway for those interested in science here are a few sentences from the abstract of this scientific paper. Because of faiar use rules on thaivisa.com I have only included 3 sentences

The Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM, 55.8 Ma), an abrupt global warming event linked to a transient increase in pCO₂, was comparable in rate and magnitude to modern anthropogenic climate change. Here we use plant fossils from the Bighorn Basin of Wyoming to document the combined effects of temperature and pCO₂ on insect herbivory... The amount and diversity of insect damage on angiosperm leaves, as well as the relative abundance of specialized damage, correlate with rising and falling temperature

http://www.pnas.org/content/105/6/1960

 

This is your idea of vague?

Because of the title, the quoting only of scientific reports supporting their agenda, the promulgation of unproven dire predictions and the downplaying of mitigating factors without justification. Would you accept similar but opposite predictions from a website labelled Global Warning Sceptics?

You might try reading further, as the article is discussing a period of TRIPLING of CO2 levels. Is that likely? Is that even the level of "too high"?

There is also the usual use of "might, could and may" to offset a 'likely' or 2.

21 minutes ago, mark131v said:

Ahhh is there anything the Junta do that you cannot justify?

 

This is about whether it is fair or right for a kid to be locked up for sharing a report from a world respected news source, whether you respect that news source is neither here nor there but locking a kid up for sharing a report sounds a little bit over board especially when you look at recent reports of people who have allegedly done far far worse crimes

 

Do you blindly judge unseen BBC articles as totally accurate? I certainly don't find  LM laws acceptable, if they were used in my own country I might possibly still be locked up. OTOH where they exist, I take care not to break them.

3 hours ago, darksidedog said:

You know things are bad when you can go to jail for simply sharing an article written by the BBC, which would have been factually correct.

The computer crimes act is an absolute disgrace, which allows people who speak nothing but the truth to be thrown in jail and actually protects wrongdoers.

I wish him the best of luck in getting bail and congratulations on the International Award, which he undoubtedly deserves.

If there were a lot more like him here, the junta would have a much harder job pushing through their oppressive legislation.

 

 

Your faith in the veracity of the BBC is interesting. Others are far less trusting.

3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

There is also evidence from the past of major damage to a wide variety of plants species from a sudden rise in CO2 (See illustrations below). 

https://www.skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html

 

I'm sorry, but if you think providing a link a to a biased website making vague pronunciations is a way of providing specific data, you are sadly mistaken. It's easy to claim too much is bad, but it is quite reasonable to ask how much is too much, and are we ever likely to see that level. I fully realise that the burning of fossil fuels is unsustainable in the long term, but making predictions of disaster (the sky is falling!) just doesn't cut it.

25 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I should have thought it would be obvious that not all plants would benefit from increased CO2. The same way that not all plants benefit from an increase in fertilizer. There is such a thing as too much.

4. Too high a concentration of CO2 causes a reduction of photosynthesis in certain of plants. There is also evidence from the past of major damage to a wide variety of plants species from a sudden rise in CO2 (See illustrations below). Higher concentrations of CO2also reduce the nutritional quality of some staples, such as wheat.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html

 

In addition to which , even if more CO2 would encourage growth in a particular plant species. there are other limiting factors. Like adequate nutrients in the soil and water supply. In the plant world those species that would benefit from increased CO2 would crowd out those that didn't or benefited less.  So, once again, more is not necessarily better. In fact it can be worse.

I can't live without water, but too much will drown me. Are we expecting out atmosphere to ever reach the level vaguely described as "too high"? 

I have to wonder if Darwin ever envisaged a time when survival of the fittest is regarded as a bad idea, secondary to the maintenance of some human concept of constancy.

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

He was elected SCCU president with a whopping 27 out of 36 council members. That really show an overwhelming undergraduates sentiment towards a more progressive Thailand rather than the feudal age that Prayut is dragging the country back. That itself is worth a scolding by the students as well as the citizens. 

Your assumption that the members of the student council are truly representative of the students in general suggests that you have little knowledge of university life. As a rule,most if not all of the student council members will be low effort arts degree students who aspire to a political career.  Those enrolled in more demanding courses and others trying to pay for their own education by working, are usually far too busy to be involved in student council.

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

What ishould have written is extra co2 encourages growth in some plants. But the main point still stands. More isnt the same as better. In fact more can be worse.

Care to nominate 1 or 2 plants that won't thrive in a richer CO2 atmosphere? 

3 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                        Except it's not an iceberg until it breaks off from the main body of ice.  Until then, it's part of the glacier which has been amassing ice century by century.  So, unless the glacier is being re-supplied with new precipitation uphill, then IT DOES CONTRIBUTE TO RISING OCEAN LEVELS. 

 

                     As for the glacier being re-supplied with ice; it's happening slowly because Antarctica is technically a desert.  For its size, it receives very little precipitation.  The super-sized calving mentioned in the OP, might be the equivalent of hundreds or thousands of years of precipitation in that particular basin.

 

                      It's amazing how, every time there's breaking scientific news showing increased GW, the deniers come out like a Greek chorus with flaccid arguments trying to convince us it's not happening and/or it's insignificant.  It's like Trump voters (most GW deniers are Trump fans, btw) who invariably justify whatever comes out of his lying mouth or tweeting fingers.

 

                     It's like trying to move a bullock cart toward a goal, and a portion of the passengers keep dragging their feet, trying to slow it down.   Actually, there are some deniers who grudgingly admit there's GW (they simply can't keep denying in the face of a plethora of scientific evidence), but they continue to insist that people can't be having an effect.   And then there are the full-throated deniers, who deny everything that points to GW, and even go so far as to claim the earth is getting colder overall.  They're in the realm of 'up is down', 'wet is dry', 'high is low', 'green is red' contrarianism. Maybe that explains the Thai drivers who drive full speed through red lights.

I hate to shatter your delusions, but by definition an ice shelf is indeed floating even if is still attached to the glacier that formed it. It is NOT sitting on the ocean floor, or somehow magically cantilevered from the mass of ice on the continent.

2 hours ago, dutchbull said:

Bad thing when we start to kill "worldleaders" Thats not done..

I agree with Voltaire, an occasional assassination tends to make those in power a bit more cautious in their ways.

My take is that the driver previously took them to Tak from BKK, a nice fare especially if the farang is paying over the set price, and offered to do the Tak-Pattaya leg when it was mentioned on the trip. Even given the empty leg to Tak, it could have still been quite profitable, and less stressful than driving in BKK traffic all day.

Long hours are not unusual in the taxi industry. In Oz, standard shifts are 12 hours, and where I work in Brisbane, 16 hours is allowed before the base switches off your computer access.

7 minutes ago, madusa said:

Perhaps (my conjecture) while putting the pin back on to the grenade he drop it. Then it was hallelujah, praise be the name of God.

There are grenades which you can put the pin back without exploding. On second thought why are they keeping grenade in the house ?

Removing/replacing pin is possible but not recommended, and fuse is not activated until flapper disengages - that is what the pin prevents. But if it blew his hand off, it would appear it was still being held or that he was attempting to pick it up after dropping it.

Fuses are either instantaneous, or with a (approximate) time setting, usually 10 seconds(?). Have to wonder if he let the flapper go, then stood there looking at it until it exploded. 

9 minutes ago, maoro2013 said:

I would have thought that seizure of assets would be after a court ruled on the case. At this time the charges are 'alleged'. Seems to work a bit back to front here, if 'work' is the correct terminology.

Assets are much more likely to be available if seized at time of charging than after the court case. Seems to be standard practise in many parts of the world.

Better luck next time.

27 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hmmmm. Given that many people agree that humans cause G W, I have to assume they never use anything powered by fossil fuel- so no oil powered cars, electricity or flying.

they may also want to consider where there steel, aluminium and plastics come from. It will be an interesting life without them.

Blew off his right hand??? OK, safety pin removed to heighten threat, grenade slips, flapper disengages to activate fuse. So did he take a few seconds to ponder what to do with it, or was it an instantaneous fuse as used in booby traps, or did he drop it and try to pick it up?

It amazes me the number of people that want everything to stay like they remember it, when the only constant is change. If an iceberg the size of Delaware, or even Texas, melts, the sea level will not rise at all, it will only fill the void it displaces.

For several years I used a VISA debit card, Oz bank, to make single bulk withdrawals in the baht 6 figure range, and there was no bank fees involved. For the last 2 years, banks have refused to allow this and only ATM withdrawals allowed. But I can buy air tickets online.

4 hours ago, White Tiger said:

I saw the CCTV footage of this accident on Thai tv this morning. To me it looked from that as if the motorcyclist was 100% at fault. It pulled straight into the right hand lane immediately in front of the car, at speed and apparently without looking. From what I saw I thought there was no way the car could have stopped or avoided hitting the motorbike.   I was puzzled as to why such a big fuss was being made and why the celeb driver was apologizing.  I felt a bit sorry for the bloke and thought he was being made into a scapegoat because he was a rich celeb. Having read this thread I now understand why there was a fuss - no licence and no insurance (and maybe failing to stop after the accident?). If he had been on the road legally then on the evidence of the CCTV footage I saw on the news I reckon he would be in the clear as to my mind there was nothing he could have done to avoid hitting the motorbike. But not being street legal (and his apparently failing to stop?) it seems have put the blame firmly at his door.  (Of course his subsequent behaviour, apparently pretending to be a good Samaritan who was not involved with the accident but who witnessed it also helps with the apportionment of blame after the event. Despicable behaviour but perhaps motivated by genuine remorse while wanting to hide the truth?). 

Not having seen the video, and relying on your report, if the motorcycle pulled in front of the car at speed and was then hit, doesn't that mean the car was moving faster? If a car is moving faster than an alleged racing motorcycle, how is the unlicensed and uninsured driver absolved of all blame?

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

Foreign Minister does have the authority for passport operation. The current junta government could have just annulled and revoked the passport. Impeachment is excessive and the 5 years ban on politics is intimidation and agenda driven. 

Yes he does. Does that give him the right to issue new passports to a fugitive criminal, who also happens to PAY him to be a member of his political party, as well as being a close relative. Might that not be considered corruption and abuse of office?

IMHO opinion the 5 year ban is totally unnecessary, the jail term term for his corruption should make his return to politics impossible.

On 29/03/2017 at 5:37 PM, jayboy said:

 

It certainly brings it into question and in any event very few of the alleged offences have come to trial so talk of "criminality" is largely beside the point.

But the real issue is that when a person is pursued by his enemies in the state through a vindictive witch hunt ( for reasons which have nothing to do with alleged offences ) there is no justice at all - and rogues like Thaksin get way with it and end up claiming the moral high ground.

No civilised country would dream of extraditing Thaksin for the reasons I have outlined above.The fact that his alleged offences are all rather trifling simply confirm that fact.And of course his pursuers do not dare invoke Thaksin's really serious alleged offences (drugs war, atrocities in South etc ) because they themselves are often complicit.




Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

His offences haven't come to trial because he refuses to face his accusers, even when his sister is PM. By your definition Al Capone wasn't a criminal, only a tax-dodger, just another similarity.

There is nothing trivial in the theft of a billion baht from KTB for which his co-accused have been given lengthy jail terms, or the financing of terrorism.

On 29/03/2017 at 8:11 PM, fantom said:

Just how high are the government subsidies in NZ? I dont just mean subsidies in the capital costs of solar panels etc but in terms of the rebates paid to return small quantities back to the grid?

 

 

To make solar attractive, most countries use a buy-back rate higher than the RETAIL price of energy. They then expect cheaper producers to reduce/stop their output during the daylight hours solar is available, but remain on hot standby to cover variations in output due to inclement weather.

On 29/03/2017 at 5:17 PM, williamgeorgeallen said:

it requires a new fuse on the fusebox in the main house. might get away with doing a suspended cable and ducting to a new fusebox with 2 more breakers in the sleepout which is required as it it going for lights and outlets. if the ground has to be smashed up and the wire ducted underground it would be much more. 

the panel on the roof is far better than a cable hung across the gap.

Are you saying that your solar isn't fused? Because I would have thought that the fuse box would be necessary whichever way you sourced your energy.

On 26/03/2017 at 6:06 PM, Eric Loh said:

It is political motivated when the corruption agencies only investigated and charged him while corruption of others aligned politicians and military personnel are never investigated and charged ??

The "Little Johnny did it too!" defence. Who cares if the prosecution is politically motivated when the charge is proven. Does the political motivation reduce the level of his criminality?

16 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

 

for me i only paid 400$ for a solar kit to run my entertainment system, charge my devices and run the lights.  would have cost 1000$ at least to get my sleepout hard wired, probably more it the wire had to be trenched. guess the surreal moment cost me at least negative 600$, in other words it saved me at least 600$. made it even more surreal. was a 5 min install.  i love the prepper aspect of being off grid as well. i am now saving my power bills on my main house to see how much power i use to take the leap into paying about 10 000$ to go full solar. my friend did it in oz 3 years ago and now pays almost no electricity bill.

Why would it cost $1000 to wire a sleepout?

2 hours ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

interesting to hear of some one in thailand with solar power. great job. i just built a sleepout near my house in new zealand and got a stand alone system with a built in battery. it was a surreal moment when i plugged the panel into the unit and it started charging. i plan to do an off grid cabin later in life when i can move out of the city, maybe with a plug in car i can charge in and draw back from. i always had the opinion that solar did not produce enough energy. in reality it is just that we use too much and need to become more energy efficient.

Just for us doubters, could you do a cost comparison to running out a mains wire? I really would like to know the price of a 'surreal moment'.