
Lacessit
Advanced Member-
Posts
30,754 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Everything posted by Lacessit
-
Yes, Canadians can have the benefit of Obamacare, high pharmaceutical costs, America's IRS. Plus a new generation of carpetbaggers heading north. Do you have any idea how stupid your post is?
-
The refineries in Middle America process heavy crude from Canada. They are not equipped to process light shale oil. It's not a matter of swapping a few valves, genius. Guess what? The tariffs Trump has put on Canada have been responded to in kind. One Canadian governor has directed all alcohol coming from any US red state be taken off supermarket shelves. Let the circus begin.
-
Trump thinks in terms of real estate. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he thought he could force Canada into a shotgun wedding. Canada is supplying 50% of America's oil, which would be a huge bonus. Perhaps he is thinking like Lyndon Johnson, it's better to have Canada inside the tent p!ssing out, than outside the tent p!ssing in.
-
I am not pro or anti EV either, although I have been labeled as a hater by some of the more fervent EV supporters. I have no problem in accepting EV's have considerable advantages in performance and fuel costs, whether it's at a public charger or home. Having solar is icing on the cake. The only time I have had real range anxiety was when I traveled between Nymagee and Cobar (77 km ) in a Ford with a 4 litre engine that consumed petrol like an alcoholic with free booze, and the tank was showing a quarter full. No aircon, and 40 C heat. I probably got there on tank fumes.
-
About every 2-3 months, I travel between Chiang Rai and Chiang Mai to visit friends. About 200 km. I usually refuel going back at Doi Saket. There are about a dozen fuel pumps at the station, and a single EV charger. So what do you do in that situation if a couple of EV's are waiting there before you to be charged? Drink coffee for an hour? I have no doubt EV's are much cheaper to run, and most owners refuel at home. However, on the road, permit me to doubt they are as convenient to refuel as an ICE. If I did run out of fuel on the road, a jerry can solves the problem. An EV, the only option is a tow truck, unless you want to cart a portable generator around with you. Life support for gas guzzlers? Not in my lifetime.
-
IIRC the opioid crisis in America was generated by a US company producing the drug oxycontin inside America. It's obvious the billions spent on drug enforcement simply does not work, and never has. The countries that have made drugs legal have reduced crime statistics. There's no profit for the criminal cartels, and addicts don't have to turn to crime to finance their habit. I expect Trump to thunder on, and achieve just as much as his predecessors. Which is zero.
-
Democracy is Failing the Young – No Wonder They Want Change
Lacessit replied to Social Media's topic in World News
True. Not as bad as Australia, household debt $276,000. -
I will start believing ICE's are on life support when the number of recharging ports across Thailand is about 2:1 greater than the number of diesel, gasoline and LPG pumps currently in existence. ICE cars will be around for at least another 30 years. As for any heavy haulage, batteries are uneconomic because they become part of the payload.
- 224 replies
-
- 14
-
-
-
-
-
Engineers are risk averse, that's why they build safety factors into just about everything constructed. IME when engineers fail, it is usually because someone - not necessarily an engineer - has cut corners. Bean counters are likely suspects. I loved Latin. The Romans had a gift for compressing thoughts into a simple, sometimes brutal, very few words. Dixi.
-
Do covid-19 mRNA vaccines cause Turbo-cancers?
Lacessit replied to Red Phoenix's topic in Covid/Vaccine
I guess awarding the Nobel Prize for medicine to Katalin Kariko and Drew Weismann in 2023 for the development of mRNA vaccines was a mistake, then. Try as I might, I can't find any reference to the article you cite being peer-reviewed. When it cites Dr, John Campbell as one of its sources, the ivermectin promoter, it's a huge red flag. -
Do covid-19 mRNA vaccines cause Turbo-cancers?
Lacessit replied to Red Phoenix's topic in Covid/Vaccine
There is another explanation for why younger people are coming down with cancers - obesity. It's become an epidemic. It's a chemical fact toxins which can cause cancer are mostly lipophilic, I.e. they are stored in fat. The body has two types of fat, subcutaneous and visceral fat, the latter is stored around the organs. It's logical the more fat a human body has, the more toxins it is capable of storing. The dose makes the poison. The US is one of the most obese nations on earth. Including children. According to the National Cancer Institute, obesity is a strong risk factor for 13 different cancer types. Blaming vaccines for cancer ignores the strong probability being a lardass isn't helping. -
Do covid-19 mRNA vaccines cause Turbo-cancers?
Lacessit replied to Red Phoenix's topic in Covid/Vaccine
You are obviously unaware of Paracelsus's maxim, "the dose makes the poison". The 100 individual substances are restricted or limited because they can be imbibed or ingested daily. A vaccine jab is far less frequent. What is your evidence? A single person with an existing lymphoma, where the cancer equally may have metastasized as a matter of course. Not all cancers respond to treatment. -
Do covid-19 mRNA vaccines cause Turbo-cancers?
Lacessit replied to Red Phoenix's topic in Covid/Vaccine
I developed lymphoma after a fairly long history of chronic lymphocytic leukemia at the end of 2021. I am now in full remission. Unfortunately for the OP's hypothesis, my lymphoma came after two rounds of conventional COVID vaccines, and before I had any mRNA boosters. I am a statistical sample of one, just as the OP is citing Professor Goldman. Absolutely meaningless without a cohort of cases. Cancers metastasize, that is their nature. Linking that to a vaccine booster is one hell of a logical leap. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc does not apply to one-offs, either for or against.