| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
GZ34 worship!
Some people are totally nuts!
http://cgi.ebay.ca/Mullard-GZ34-meta...item2a023804f7 US$47 at this time with 5 bids. Cheers, Roger |
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 2, 3:21*pm, Engineer wrote:
Some people are totally nuts! http://cgi.ebay.ca/Mullard-GZ34-meta...mZ180425852151... US$47 at this time with 5 bids. Cheers, Roger An NIB Dynaco-labeled tube sold for nearly US$200 some little bit ago. That $47 ain't nothing yet. Funny to think I have a semester's tuition to our local state college sitting in my spares box. And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 3, 7:33�am, Peter Wieck wrote:
On Nov 2, 3:21�pm, Engineer wrote: Some people are totally nuts! http://cgi.ebay.ca/Mullard-GZ34-meta...mZ180425852151... US$47 at this time with 5 bids. Cheers, Roger An NIB Dynaco-labeled tube sold for nearly US$200 some little bit ago. That $47 ain't nothing yet. Funny to think I have a semester's tuition to our local state college sitting in my spares box. And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Hi RATs! These days, many feel emboldened to publicly insult every one they don't like. No matter how petty their deep, personal sense of outrage. It is possible you are truly doing God's will, I guess. Just seems like you are being a self righteous moron, to me. But, hey, you started this thread. Dig it or frig it. It is a free country. No matter how low you wish to take it. Happy Ears! Al PS An undercover agent in a nearby city was able to purchase sexual access to a twelve year old girl. The price was $200.00. Some of us know true outrage. The rest of you worry about the price. Ain't freedom a bitch? |
|
#4
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 3, 9:08*am, Fu Knee wrote:
On Nov 3, 7:33 am, Peter Wieck wrote: On Nov 2, 3:21 pm, Engineer wrote: Some people are totally nuts! http://cgi.ebay.ca/Mullard-GZ34-meta...mZ180425852151.... US$47 at this time with 5 bids. Cheers, Roger An NIB Dynaco-labeled tube sold for nearly US$200 some little bit ago. That $47 ain't nothing yet. Funny to think I have a semester's tuition to our local state college sitting in my spares box. And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Hi RATs! These days, many feel emboldened to publicly insult every one they don't like. No matter how petty their deep, personal sense of outrage. It is possible you are truly doing God's will, I guess. Just seems like you are being a self righteous moron, to me. But, hey, you started this thread. Dig it or frig it. It is a free country. No matter how low you wish to take it. Happy Ears! Al PS An undercover agent in a nearby city was able to purchase sexual access to a twelve year old girl. The price was $200.00. Some of us know true outrage. The rest of you worry about the price. Ain't freedom a bitch? It's up to $66 at this time with 6 bids. Al, I don't know the would-be buyers so cannot claim to like or dislike them but, as a group, I do think they are nuts... and, as you will agree, freedom brings the right to be one! The good news is that I have a couple of GZ34's in my tube inventory. At this rate I can't afford to keep them... the opportunity cost is getting too high! Cheers, Roger |
|
#5
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 5, 12:14*am, "Alex" wrote:
And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Alex: Never thought that someone would be imitating slow start. How do they do it? MOSFET in series controlled via an optocoupler from an RC circuit powered from an additional rectifier of the heater voltage? My guess is a much simpler device based on thermistors. At the going rate of something between $15 and $35, and given the range of sizes - from about the size of a typical 'button' tube to nearly as large as the glass original, there is not a whole lot of room inside to mess about with cascaded MOSFETs. Again, guessing, the cheaper versions are straight-up solid-state diodes and maybe a couple of resistors across the filament pins (maybe). But the more expensive versions claiming the slow-start system use thermistors. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#6
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
In article
, Peter Wieck wrote: On Nov 5, 12:14*am, "Alex" wrote: And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Alex: Never thought that someone would be imitating slow start. How do they do it? MOSFET in series controlled via an optocoupler from an RC circuit powered from an additional rectifier of the heater voltage? My guess is a much simpler device based on thermistors. At the going rate of something between $15 and $35, and given the range of sizes - from about the size of a typical 'button' tube to nearly as large as the glass original, there is not a whole lot of room inside to mess about with cascaded MOSFETs. Again, guessing, the cheaper versions are straight-up solid-state diodes and maybe a couple of resistors across the filament pins (maybe). But the more expensive versions claiming the slow-start system use thermistors. I don't understand how thermistors could provide "slow-start" for the B+ voltage, I would think the capacitor following the rectifier is still going to charge up to nearly 1.41 times the RMS transformer secondary voltage until the power tubes warm up and start drawing current from the rectifier, thermistors or not? Perhaps it is all in how you choose to define "slow-start". -- Regards, John Byrns Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
|
#7
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 3, 6:58*pm, flipper wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:36:11 -0800 (PST), Engineer wrote: On Nov 3, 9:08*am, Fu Knee wrote: On Nov 3, 7:33 am, Peter Wieck wrote: On Nov 2, 3:21 pm, Engineer wrote: Some people are totally nuts! http://cgi.ebay.ca/Mullard-GZ34-meta...mZ180425852151... US$47 at this time with 5 bids. Cheers, Roger An NIB Dynaco-labeled tube sold for nearly US$200 some little bit ago. That $47 ain't nothing yet. Funny to think I have a semester's tuition to our local state college sitting in my spares box. And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Hi RATs! These days, many feel emboldened to publicly insult every one they don't like. No matter how petty their deep, personal sense of outrage. It is possible you are truly doing God's will, I guess. Just seems like you are being a self righteous moron, to me. But, hey, you started this thread. Dig it or frig it. It is a free country. No matter how low you wish to take it. Happy Ears! Al PS An undercover agent in a nearby city was able to purchase sexual access to a twelve year old girl. The price was $200.00. Some of us know true outrage. The rest of you worry about the price. Ain't freedom a bitch? It's up to $66 at this time with 6 bids. Al, I don't know the would-be buyers so cannot claim to like or dislike them but, as a group, I do think they are nuts... and, as you will agree, freedom brings the right to be one! How do you determine 'nuts'? A cursory google indicates those prices are not at the 'nut' stage, at least as compared to the 'going price' on most places. The good news is that I have a couple of GZ34's in my tube inventory. At this rate I can't afford to keep them... the opportunity cost is getting too high! If they're Mullards with a metal base. If you want 'nuts', take a gander at this site's prices. https://www.tubeworld.com/5ar4.htm 1 tube $795) GZ34 Philips Miniwatt Holland NOS (rS1-55B=1955) SMOOTH SPOT WELDED PLATES - double D getter halos - original box They've got some GEs for a mere $60, though. Athttp://www.tubedepot.com/5ar4.htmlthe 'whatever NOS we have' is $139 each. Oh, no. When I went to check I just discovered my favorite tube source, radiodaze, is out of the tube business. Nuts. Cheers, Roger Holy cathodes, Batman! |
|
#8
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
And the solid-state replacements sell in the US$30s or so including the slow-start characteristics. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Alex: Never thought that someone would be imitating slow start. How do they do it? MOSFET in series controlled via an optocoupler from an RC circuit powered from an additional rectifier of the heater voltage? |
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 5, 11:03*pm, "Alex" wrote:
"François Yves Le Gal" wrote in messagenews:g3v3f5tpf6aeuscpqdv2rmgeb1b8r1jhbk@4ax .com... On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 21:14:44 -0800, "Alex" wrote: Never thought that someone would be imitating slow start. How do they do it? A couple of NTC thermistors in series. High initial resistance decreasing with temperature. Plus power R's if you need valve-like source R. I see... Cheating... It might not start-up at all if the load is light, e.g., output tube pulled out of the radio. However for typical applications this thermistor solution is smart enough. There are those who would suggest that using tubes is 'cheating'. In any case the (a) resistor in the diode circuit could provide heat if necessary. Further to this, the 15V +/- voltage drop across the two diodes would be about right as well. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#10
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
"François Yves Le Gal" wrote in message ... On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 21:14:44 -0800, "Alex" wrote: Never thought that someone would be imitating slow start. How do they do it? A couple of NTC thermistors in series. High initial resistance decreasing with temperature. Plus power R's if you need valve-like source R. I see... Cheating... It might not start-up at all if the load is light, e.g., output tube pulled out of the radio. However for typical applications this thermistor solution is smart enough. |
|
#11
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 5, 11:05*pm, Peter Wieck wrote:
On Nov 5, 11:03*pm, "Alex" wrote: "François Yves Le Gal" wrote in messagenews:g3v3f5tpf6aeuscpqdv2rmgeb1b8r1jhbk@4ax .com... On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 21:14:44 -0800, "Alex" wrote: Never thought that someone would be imitating slow start. How do they do it? A couple of NTC thermistors in series. High initial resistance decreasing with temperature. Plus power R's if you need valve-like source R. I see... Cheating... It might not start-up at all if the load is light, e.g., output tube pulled out of the radio. However for typical applications this thermistor solution is smart enough. There are those who would suggest that using tubes is 'cheating'. In any case the (a) resistor in the diode circuit could provide heat if necessary. Further to this, the 15V +/- voltage drop across the two diodes would be about right as well. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Probably the issue of delayed B+ or slowed B+ turn on has been discussed a thousand times during my last 9 years at this group. I've forgotten much of what was said. In my latest amp project I have a remote PSU for 2 x 60W SE amps with 6 x 6550 in each. The anode supply is +484V at 700mA and there is a screen/driver/input supply of +430V at 150mA. I don't use GZ34 for the B+ supply because I would need about 5 of them. I do have some two pairs of 6A rated Si diodes in series on each side of the 410V-0-410V HT winding. Why would anyone use GZ34, ever? For the 700mA anode supply there is a 4 ohm resistance in series with the diodes before they charge two 60uF motor start caps in series which gives 30uF. Then I have a 2.5H choke feeding 705uF made up of 6 x 470uF 350V caps. Then there are two 36 ohm 20W R from the 705uF feeding two lots of 470uF made up from 4 in series/parallel and this gives a fairly resonance free supply to each 60W channel. I also have a 1uF +100 ohm R series network across the choke which makes it have a damped parallel resonance at 100Hz and thus reduces 100Hz ripple after C2 by about 15dB; ie, it makes the L act as though is was 10H not 2.5H. The choke has 18 ohms dcr. The only delay I have is a 25 ohm R in series with the 240V mains input to the 1.1kVA power tranny I have. After 4 seconds when the B+ has risen to about 70% of its final initial value of 550V the relay closes and another slight surge with inrush current happens when the B + goes to 550V. After about 12 seconds the 6550 cathodes begin emission and the the B+ gracefully sags to the wanted 484V. The ripple voltage at the 30uF of C1 is about 50Vrms. But for the time the initial charge up is occuring the dc outflow from C1 is large even with the 25 ohms and so the ripple voltage is also quite high. The peak charge current is somewhat low because of this arrangement. I could have had a large value cap for C1 and allowed the C1 voltage to stay at about +550V then I'd have needed a dropping resistance to get my wanted +484V, and that would have produced 46W of wasted heat so it was far better to just use C1 caps that have high reactance values, 53ohms in this case, and allow the rectifier output Vdc to be a bit low. Reactances don't dissipate heat. My supply runs nice and cool. There is a small amount of transformer noise. Should a tube decide to conduct far more Idc than it should, the amp will turn off, but if the protect circuit fails then the extra Idc could go to 1.2A with just one 6550 becoming saturated. The ripple voltage would go much higher and B+ would sag, and the there is a 4A fuse between HTwinding CT and 0V. Plus a mains fuse of 4A. Both a fast blow types. About all I needed was the delay R of 25 ohms which also restricts the large currents when you have to heat up cold cathode filaments when the dcr is low. I don't see any reason to have a greater inrush delay than I do. In a Quad-II amp with GZ34 or GZ32, the B+ surges up to about +440V well before the output KT66 turn themselves on. So the tube rectifier does not delay B+ at all. I tried using a GZ34 in series with B+ to make a slow turn on series diode after using Si diodes into 100uF with a further RC following filter. It was pointless because the B+ still went way up before the OP tubes pulled it down to about 380V at the OPT CT. The simplest way to have adelay if you must is to uses voltage doubler supply where one might have a 200Vac HT winding which can be controlled by an easy to get 240V rated mains relay. Then the delay can be made for 20 seconds, and you have hot tubes and there is a considerable inrush to charge up a bunch of caps as well as the initial flow of Ia in the tubes with wobbles and surges as the whole driver/input amp comes alive as well. So one might need to have some series R to slow this process and avoid excessive peak charge currents to allow a useful fuse value. Its not too hard to have two resistances in series with the 200Vac HT winding and shunt one at 10 seconds and the other 6 seconds later. This allows two fairly slow step ups of the B+. I hate mains thermistors after seeing so many of them fail dismally in amps. If you turn off an amp while the thermistor is hot and then on again soon afterwards, the purpose of the thermistor is lost, as the extra current can make them overheat, maybe explode. After building SE amps with 6 x 6550in each I realised that one MIGHT get nice sound with a single 6550 but when you use 6 of them you vanquish all doubt. Patrick Turner. |
|
#12
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 7, 3:24*pm, François Yves Le Gal wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 02:55:05 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: Why would anyone use GZ34, ever? Go mercury... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ury_Arc_Valve%... 125KV, thusands of amps... Yabbut.... REALLY noisy! Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#13
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
"Patrick Turner" wrote in message news:2b72ca40-867f-4017-afc4- In my latest amp project I have a remote PSU for 2 x 60W SE amps with 6 x 6550 in each. The anode supply is +484V at 700mA and there is a screen/driver/input supply of +430V at 150mA. Alex: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... |
|
#14
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 8, 7:24*am, François Yves Le Gal wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 02:55:05 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: Why would anyone use GZ34, ever? Go mercury... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ury_Arc_Valve%... 125KV, thusands of amps... So when you have a choke input supply with two of those 125KV thingies, what size is the choke? And after the choke, would i have to use electrolytics or would polypropylene caps souind better? Patrick Turner. |
|
#15
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
Patrick Turner wrote:
On Nov 8, 7:24 am, François Yves Le Gal wrote: On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 02:55:05 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: Why would anyone use GZ34, ever? Go mercury... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ury_Arc_Valve%... 125KV, thusands of amps... So when you have a choke input supply with two of those 125KV thingies, what size is the choke? And after the choke, would i have to use electrolytics or would polypropylene caps souind better? Patrick Turner. I would recommend two 8ft by 4ft sheets of 20 gauge aluminium separated by an oil cloth. Cheers Ian |
|
#16
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 8, 7:21*am, François Yves Le Gal wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:27:13 -0800, "Alex" wrote: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal.... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs.... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. We are a species that fouls its own nest, and does too little too late to avoid a problem that is slow to affect us. Anyway, the amps I have just made consume about 500W when used. But the switch many ppl are making towards "digital" amplifiers, class D, which are 96% efficient is offsetting the effect steam engines that I am still making in tiny numbers. I didn't have any children which is the worst thing anyone could do to a planet. There are too many ppl doing too many things that are destructive here already. If we all just didn't breed for 25 years and spent the time instead fixing the major problems we'd be OK but it ain't never gonna happen. Most of the young are driven uncontrolably to ****. I liked to **** when I was young but I wasn't going to breed unless everything looked like it would work out. It never did for me. Much of the time I wondered what on earth was the point of breeding. Everyone who doesn't breed leaves more in the world for those who do. So If I make a few tube amps, so what? People are buying houses here which are twice the size of those their parents bought 30 years ago. The way ppl live generally even though they don't have any interest in hi-fi seems to consume much more energy than 30 years ago and in fact each succeeding generation seems to want more and more than the last which helps prove that the more they get, the more they want and the less satisfied they become. Lightbulbs are about to be completely outlawed here. But ligthing is only 10% of the problem. The real problem is hot water and air conditioning and travelling and farming and all the other things. If we had 6 billion people living like they did 100 years ago their energy per head might have been 50W/hr. But now everyone wants to have access to 2kW/hr to sustain a modern western way of life. What goes up must come down, and if we dig up vast amounts of carbon which took millions of years to be buried underground and send it skyward in a couple of centuries then the temperature will rise, and our cleverness will backfire us down. I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. Our species will get a kick or two in the butt before then though, and from the boot we made ourselves. Patrick Turner. |
|
#17
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:23:09 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner
wrote: On Nov 8, 7:21*am, François Yves Le Gal wrote: On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:27:13 -0800, "Alex" wrote: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. We are a species that fouls its own nest, and does too little too late to avoid a problem that is slow to affect us. Anyway, the amps I have just made consume about 500W when used. But the switch many ppl are making towards "digital" amplifiers, class D, which are 96% efficient is offsetting the effect steam engines that I am still making in tiny numbers. I didn't have any children which is the worst thing anyone could do to a planet. There are too many ppl doing too many things that are destructive here already. If we all just didn't breed for 25 years and spent the time instead fixing the major problems we'd be OK but it ain't never gonna happen. Most of the young are driven uncontrolably to ****. I liked to **** when I was young but I wasn't going to breed unless everything looked like it would work out. It never did for me. Much of the time I wondered what on earth was the point of breeding. Everyone who doesn't breed leaves more in the world for those who do. So If I make a few tube amps, so what? People are buying houses here which are twice the size of those their parents bought 30 years ago. The way ppl live generally even though they don't have any interest in hi-fi seems to consume much more energy than 30 years ago and in fact each succeeding generation seems to want more and more than the last which helps prove that the more they get, the more they want and the less satisfied they become. Lightbulbs are about to be completely outlawed here. But ligthing is only 10% of the problem. The real problem is hot water and air conditioning and travelling and farming and all the other things. If we had 6 billion people living like they did 100 years ago their energy per head might have been 50W/hr. But now everyone wants to have access to 2kW/hr to sustain a modern western way of life. What goes up must come down, and if we dig up vast amounts of carbon which took millions of years to be buried underground and send it skyward in a couple of centuries then the temperature will rise, and our cleverness will backfire us down. I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. Our species will get a kick or two in the butt before then though, and from the boot we made ourselves. Patrick Turner. You are talking about global cooling? You appear to be suggesting that it would be a good idea to make it happen even quicker than it is right now. d |
|
#18
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 9, 2:29*am, François Yves Le Gal wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:51:51 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: So when you have a choke input supply with two of those 125KV thingies, what size is the choke? Here is the choke room at a secret US facility:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...er_Dam%27s_gen... Eight chokes in wells with a secondary water cooling system. They want you to believe that they are generators, but they are chokes for the ultimate single ended amplifier... Two megawatts from a single Eimac bottle ! Class C? http://www.triodeel.com/cemco.jpg And after the choke, would i have to use electrolytics or would polypropylene caps souind better? Paper in oil is the only way to go. :-) And I guess the girl's name is Harmonic Desirabelle, no? But is it not becomming a trend to send power long distance along transmission lines with DC currents? Patrick Turner. |
|
#19
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 9, 2:31*am, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:23:09 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: On Nov 8, 7:21*am, François Yves Le Gal wrote: On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:27:13 -0800, "Alex" wrote: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. We are a species that fouls its own nest, and does too little too late to avoid a problem that is slow to affect us. Anyway, the amps I have just made consume about 500W when used. But the switch many ppl are making towards "digital" amplifiers, class D, which are 96% efficient is offsetting the effect steam engines that I am still making in tiny numbers. I didn't have any children which is the worst thing anyone could do to a planet. There are too many ppl doing too many things that are destructive here already. If we all just didn't breed for 25 years and spent the time instead fixing the major problems we'd be OK but it ain't never gonna happen. Most of the young are driven uncontrolably to ****. I liked to **** when I was young but I wasn't going to breed unless everything looked like it would work out. It never did for me. Much of the time I wondered what on earth was the point of breeding. Everyone who doesn't breed leaves more in the world for those who do. So If I make a few tube amps, so what? People are buying houses here which are twice the size of those their parents bought 30 years ago. The way ppl live generally even though they don't have any interest in hi-fi seems to consume much more energy than 30 years ago and in fact each succeeding generation seems to want more and more than the last which helps prove that the more they get, the more they want and the less satisfied they become. Lightbulbs are about to be completely outlawed here. But ligthing is only 10% of the problem. The real problem is hot water and air conditioning and travelling and farming and all the other things. If we had 6 billion people living like they did 100 years ago their energy per head might have been 50W/hr. But now everyone wants to have access to 2kW/hr to sustain a modern western way of life. What goes up must come down, and if we dig up vast amounts of carbon which took millions of years to be buried underground and send it skyward in a couple of centuries then the temperature will rise, and our cleverness will backfire us down. I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. Our species will get a kick or two in the butt before then though, and from the boot we made ourselves. Patrick Turner. You are talking about global cooling? You appear to be suggesting that it would be a good idea to make it happen even quicker than it is right now. d- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Global cooling may be appear to be happening. What I suggested was that there will be instability with the climate as it progresses to a settled state of being hotter. The instability will be periods of years where we think its trending hotter, and then cooler, before finally settling on being a lot hotter. In 1976 I recall many said that the global pollution we are spewing skywards would cause an ice age. To some extent the particulate matter that is circulating in the air as a result of mankind's activities is causing cooling, or a reduction of the rate of heating. Although many might say we are on a cooling trend now I think the records will show that arctic ice and antarctic ice is undergoing a net depletion and only if the ice caps were undergoing a substantial net increase could we say there is real cooling. If you look at glacial retreat around the world, there is further evidence of gradual warming. If the average T rises 0.05 degrees a year, it takes 100 years to go 5 degrees average warmer. The amount of yearly increase seems trifling, and to not even be happening. But 100 years is a tiny amount of time compared to say when the last ice age occurred, or to when the last hot age where there was no ice caps and sea levels were 100M higher. Because the changes to the CO2 % levels look set to trend up for 50 years despite the slow addoption of alternatives like nuclear power and solar power with collectors the size of Texas, ppl will have to get used to hotter weather. Many ppl now like it hot, and thrive in hot climates; older folks retire to Miami, or from southern cool cities like Melbourne to Brisbane. But in 50 years Brisbane may have weather like Jakata, and with major cyclones each year. And the coastal cities and towns which cost so much for previous generations to build will be subject to major flooding. There isn't much evidence of sea level rise yet. But once that process gets underway it will panick a lot of people. I have lived here in Canberra since 1972, and have seen an overall trend to many more days where C max goes over 30C, and to warmer winters. Its been 15 years since I saw my swimming pool get an overnight layer if ice. Before that I got it at least several nights a year. 100 years is time enough for 4 generations of people to get used to things getting hotter. Large tracts of land will become available in the northern hemisphere for development. But methinks living in the tropics could get so wild during cyclone seasons that many areas will be unviable. Gradually many people will vote with their feet, and move away north or south. This mainly means hordes of little brown people going where they ain't welcome. If there are mas starvations, so be it; its just Nature's way of dealing with a problem species. The Bible says the Lord said go forth and multiply, and subjugate all of Nature to the glory of God. This of course is utter BS, because God doesn't exist as believers imagine he does. God is there all right but He, She, or It don't give a **** about any of us. And we have gone forth, and we have bred like rabbits, and the paddock is now full of rabbits, and it is still nearly every marrying couple's dream to have children, and they complain bitterly about the cost of living, ie, the cost of living like a king and queen. They expect everyone else to do something about the environment. They think they are doing their bit to stop using light bulbs and stop using plastic shopping bags and even stop buying tube amps. They prefer a massive TV set to play movies where the sirens and police and explosions reign supreme. They buy a Toyota Prious for $39,000 instead of something costing less to replace but which is still fairly efficient. They will not buy a bicycle. Those billions scraping along in 3rd world countries on motorcycles dream of a car. But when you do the total picture of carbon accounting, all the little people of the world in both rich and poor countries are wanting ****en this and ****en that are net INCREASING CO2 emissions. They are addicted to dreaming of a materially well off future, and addicted to consumerism, and the more they get, the more insecure and anxious they become so the more junk food they eat so national waistline measurements are trending up like C02. We are an extremely flawed species. We are like the farmer who comes to his land, and leaves it in far worse condition then when he came. Planet Earth is feeling sick and is getting a temperature. She might have a good spew to get rid of us. Patrick Turner. |
|
#20
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
In article
, Patrick Turner wrote: I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. There is always the chance that earth will be wiped out by a collision with a giant space rock long before it is consumed by an expanding sun. -- Regards, John Byrns Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
|
#21
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
In article
, Patrick Turner wrote: On Nov 9, 2:29*am, François Yves Le Gal wrote: On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:51:51 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: So when you have a choke input supply with two of those 125KV thingies, what size is the choke? Here is the choke room at a secret US facility:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...over_Dam%27s_g en... Eight chokes in wells with a secondary water cooling system. They want you to believe that they are generators, but they are chokes for the ultimate single ended amplifier... Two megawatts from a single Eimac bottle ! I would bet that it takes two of those Eimac bottles to make Two megawatts, actually in excess of 8 megawatts peak power. Class C? http://www.triodeel.com/cemco.jpg Do you remember the type number on that "bottle"? If it is a triode I would bet that they are connected as a Doherty linear amplifier, not class C. If it is a tetrode they are probably connected as a screen modulated Doherty amplifier, again not really class C. IIRC these tubes were used in a high power AM broadcast transmitter built by Continental Electronics, I think I have the Continental catalog sheet for this transmitter somewhere around here, or am I totally confused about where this tube was used, having a senior moment? -- Regards, John Byrns Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
|
#22
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
Patrick Turner wrote:
In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. **Only if you believe he knows the truth. Are you sure he said we are, rather than possibly, or probably? It's hardly an exact science. It is not good propoganda to say that we are already beyond some point of no return, obviously, coz ppl will give up and redouble their profligacy. May as well die happy. We are a species that fouls its own nest, and does too little too late to avoid a problem that is slow to affect us. **Everything fouls its own nest. We had a nice caustic atmosphere until it was trashed by a previous bunch of witless organisms. Anyway, the amps I have just made consume about 500W when used. But the switch many ppl are making towards "digital" amplifiers, class D, which are 96% efficient is offsetting the effect steam engines that I am still making in tiny numbers. I didn't have any children which is the worst thing anyone could do to a planet. **LOL, which is rare here, for me. Ask not what our children can do for our planet, but what our planet can do for our children. Having none, perhaps you have missed the point? There are too many ppl doing too many things that are destructive here already. If we all just didn't breed for 25 years and spent the time instead fixing the major problems we'd be OK but it ain't never gonna happen. Most of the young are driven uncontrolably to ****. **So they don't starve when they get old. The calculus of ****ing continues to confound even the most advanced societies. Pensions in capitalist states have weakened its fundamental dynamic but kids are still socially necessary, so the state jiggles the costs. The delay in this feedback loop, together with the hysteresis arising from religion and other forces of tradition, lead to overshoots and oscillations. Increasingly, migration is globalising the issues (er..as it were). The maths, as with most social and environmental problems, gets too big and complicated for analysis to grasp. China knew that but went ahead and grappled with it anyway. Basically successful but very problematic. **All those years ago, when China had embarked on its population control programme, my Branch received a delegation sent by the CPC to explain what they were up to. They were engagingly earnest and optimistic, calculating and humane, and very disciplined. Something had to be done, and that was the best plan they could think of. They predicted all the problems we have seen since, but couldn't quantify many of them. Better than mass starvation or civil war, or both, they said, as far as it seemed to them possible to know such things. Better red than dead, they said, more or less; with considerable trepidation because they were conscious of making the biggest decision in the history of the world. I liked to **** when I was young but I wasn't going to breed unless everything looked like it would work out. It never did for me. Much of the time I wondered what on earth was the point of breeding. Everyone who doesn't breed leaves more in the world for those who do. So If I make a few tube amps, so what? **Best to keep a low profile. Open defiance rankles with regulators. People are buying houses here which are twice the size of those their parents bought 30 years ago. The way ppl live generally even though they don't have any interest in hi-fi seems to consume much more energy than 30 years ago and in fact each succeeding generation seems to want more and more than the last which helps prove that the more they get, the more they want and the less satisfied they become. Lightbulbs are about to be completely outlawed here. But ligthing is only 10% of the problem. The real problem is hot water and air conditioning and travelling and farming and all the other things. If we had 6 billion people living like they did 100 years ago their energy per head might have been 50W/hr. But now everyone wants to have access to 2kW/hr to sustain a modern western way of life. What goes up must come down, and if we dig up vast amounts of carbon which took millions of years to be buried underground and send it skyward in a couple of centuries then the temperature will rise, and our cleverness will backfire us down. **Capitalism entails and depends upon economic growth, as do all preceeding forms of social organisation. That's the fundamental issue that Communism addresses. In Socialist states managed by Communist Parties, growth may not be necessary but it is still desirable. No system has a good record of using resources efficiently. However, China seems to me to be the most likely, perhaps the only, state able to take the bull by the horns. Elsewhere, politicians have visions but can't implement decisions. I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. Our species will get a kick or two in the butt before then though, and from the boot we made ourselves. **Any number of things might happen. Life, albeit not us, may survive a supernova. I don't think we know a great deal about them. Your conclusion is simplistic, of course: climate is much more than temperature, and the environment is much more than climate. **At the root of all this is a basic question of philosophy, about the relationship between quality and quantity of life. Given the choice, what kind of things should we consider when trading one for the other? We could decide to have no children, stuff ourselves stupid with all the earth's resources, and use our valve amps to the end. Or we could be miserly and miserable ****ers for eons. **Ian |
|
#23
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 10, 3:39*am, "Ian Iveson"
wrote: At the root of all this is a basic question of philosophy, about the relationship between quality and quantity of life. Given the choice, what kind of things should we consider when trading one for the other? We could decide to have no children, stuff ourselves stupid with all the earth's resources, and use our valve amps to the end. Or we could be miserly and miserable ****ers for eons. Mpffff... Not hardly the way it works. The purpose of any given species is to prepare the way for the next species just a little better at competing for that particular ecological niche. At present we are preparing for a species that will survive a high-carbon atmosphere with a high relative humidity, higher sea-levels - but slightly less salt concentration, a greater amount of sulphur and various other gaseous products-of-combustion around as well as various analogous solids - mercury, cadmium and similar. The planet has gone from primarily soft life, to exoskeletons to backbones, from cold blooded to warm blooded, from copper-based blood to iron-based, and each form of life got pretty complicated before it was displaced as the dominant form. And each form of life tried different approaches - size, quantity, speed, only relatively recently brains. All humans are doing is accelerating the process very slightly. And all we are doing is relocating the various elements from one form and location to another, discounting the miniscule amounts being shot into space of course. So, we best serve our purpose by behaving exactly as we do - and pretty much as every other species does - reproduce like mad, use it up and stop adapting, stop changing, stop evolving. Once that happens as a species we are doomed - after which it is only a matter of time. And as one would put down a beloved pet when it is clear that it is in pain and cannot be made better - we should more-or-less treat ourselves the same way. And make way for our replacements in the next several million years or so - a tiny fraction of time as the earth measures things anyway. Keeping always in mind that nature does not particularly care about intelligence except as a way for a species to dominate its niche a little bit better. But the right virus at the right moment proves how little brains really mean in the scheme of things. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#24
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:39:56 -0000, "Ian Iveson"
wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. Just because he said something doesn't make it true, or a valid conclusion. ... |
|
#25
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 10, 8:36*am, PeterD wrote:
Just because he said something doesn't make it true, or a valid conclusion. Of course not. In any case the quicker we hasten our departure the quicker the next dominant species evolves. That it will do so is an historical absolute, all we are doing is dickering over the timing. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#26
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 9, 12:37*pm, John Byrns wrote:
In article , *Patrick Turner wrote: I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. There is always the chance that earth will be wiped out by a collision with a giant space rock long before it is consumed by an expanding sun. Well indeed. OK, so a rock wipes out most life in only 5 million years time, like the one 65mill ago. So another 50million years drifts by, and some life form evolves again.....and all this maybe several times before Earth is finally fried. The future and the unknown worries so many people that some of them invented BS about the Rapture, and Judgement Day, and God and so on. But be good while your'e alive. Hell might just exist. Patrick Turner. -- Regards, John Byrns Surf my web pages at, *http://fmamradios.com/ |
|
#27
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 10, 7:39*pm, "Ian Iveson"
wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. **Only if you believe he knows the truth. Are you sure he said we are, rather than possibly, or probably? It's hardly an exact science. It is not good propoganda to say that we are already beyond some point of no return, obviously, coz ppl will give up and redouble their profligacy. May as well die happy. I cannot know all the truth. All the truth is an infinite amount of information and I have only a finite brain which cannot understand infinite knowledge. But Lovelock seems to be fairly right to me. If in 50 years time there are 12 billion people all needing 2kWH to have a life, and most of that is via fossil burning, then mankind's gross activity is like a huge volcano that just won't give up spewing ****e into the air. They'll be dire consequences. We are a species that fouls its own nest, and does too little too late to avoid a problem that is slow to affect us. **Everything fouls its own nest. We had a nice caustic atmosphere until it was trashed by a previous bunch of witless organisms. Anyway, the amps I have just made consume about 500W when used. But the switch many ppl are making towards "digital" amplifiers, class D, which are 96% efficient is offsetting the effect steam engines that I am still making in tiny numbers. I didn't have any children which is the worst thing anyone could do to a planet. **LOL, which is rare here, for me. Ask not what our children can do for our planet, but what our planet can do for our children. Having none, perhaps you have missed the point? There are too many ppl doing too many things that are destructive here already. If we all just didn't breed for 25 years and spent the time instead fixing the major problems we'd be OK but it ain't never gonna happen. Most of the young are driven uncontrolably to ****. **So they don't starve when they get old. In well educated societies, people don't need to breed much to not starve in old age. Only a small % of ppl are required for food production, and even if you lost your sons and daughters the system would feed you. We don't breed because we need to any more; we breed because we like to see our genes flourish; its supposedly a challenge that's irrestistable, groovy in fact, and cool, awesome, etc, when your'e young of course. But at present the slice of the world each person gets is becoming smaller and smaller. The calculus of ****ing continues to confound even the most advanced societies. Pensions in capitalist states have weakened its fundamental dynamic but kids are still socially necessary, so the state jiggles the costs. The delay in this feedback loop, together with the hysteresis arising from religion and other forces of tradition, lead to overshoots and oscillations. Indeed. Increasingly, migration is globalising the issues (er..as it were). The maths, as with most social and environmental problems, gets too big and complicated for analysis to grasp. China knew that but went ahead and grappled with it anyway. Basically successful but very problematic. **All those years ago, when China had embarked on its population control programme, my Branch received a delegation sent by the CPC to explain what they were up to. They were engagingly earnest and optimistic, calculating and humane, and very disciplined. Something had to be done, and that was the best plan they could think of. They predicted all the problems we have seen since, but couldn't quantify many of them. Better than mass starvation or civil war, or both, they said, as far as it seemed to them possible to know such things. Better red than dead, they said, more or less; with considerable trepidation because they were conscious of making the biggest decision in the history of the world. Well we ought to thank the CPC for their stern limitations on breeding. That left more world for everyone else "on our side" to exploit. But someone said "To become rich is glorious", and now China is hell bent on materialism and 2kWH per person of energy use. I liked to **** when I was young but I wasn't going to breed unless everything looked like it would work out. It never did for me. Much of the time I wondered what on earth was the point of breeding. Everyone who doesn't breed leaves more in the world for those who do. So If I make a few tube amps, so what? **Best to keep a low profile. Open defiance rankles with regulators. People are buying houses here which are twice the size of those their parents bought 30 years ago. The way ppl live generally even though they don't have any interest in hi-fi seems to consume much more energy than 30 years ago and in fact each succeeding generation seems to want more and more than the last which helps prove that the more they get, the more they want and the less satisfied they become. Lightbulbs are about to be completely outlawed here. But ligthing is only 10% of the problem. The real problem is hot water and air conditioning and travelling and farming and all the other things. If we had 6 billion people living like they did 100 years ago their energy per head might have been 50W/hr. But now everyone wants to have access to 2kW/hr to sustain a modern western way of life. What goes up must come down, and if we dig up vast amounts of carbon which took millions of years to be buried underground and send it skyward in a couple of centuries then the temperature will rise, and our cleverness will backfire us down. **Capitalism entails and depends upon economic growth, as do all preceeding forms of social organisation. That's the fundamental issue that Communism addresses. In Socialist states managed by Communist Parties, growth may not be necessary but it is still desirable. No system has a good record of using resources efficiently. However, China seems to me to be the most likely, perhaps the only, state able to take the bull by the horns. Elsewhere, politicians have visions but can't implement decisions. I think things will get increasingly unstable with oscillations in temperatures and weather until finally settling at a much warmer climate. Life will of course go on for millions of years because the earth will not be consumed by an expanding sun for another 1/2 billion years. Our species will get a kick or two in the butt before then though, and from the boot we made ourselves. **Any number of things might happen. Life, albeit not us, may survive a supernova. I don't think we know a great deal about them. Your conclusion is simplistic, of course: climate is much more than temperature, and the environment is much more than climate. Indeed. But we are getting mid summer day temps now although its springtime. 11 degrees C above average. **At the root of all this is a basic question of philosophy, about the relationship between quality and quantity of life. Given the choice, what kind of things should we consider when trading one for the other? We could decide to have no children, stuff ourselves stupid with all the earth's resources, and use our valve amps to the end. Or we could be miserly and miserable ****ers for eons. Or we could get busy with changing from fossils to nuclear and all forms of "green" alternatives like solar and wind power. Then we could be a stuffin, and a muckin and a fukkin, and have our tube amps. But so many hate the change required. They cry out like they always have, "We'll be rooned"..... Change always costs money. I might have to pay $5,000 per year for electricity instead of the present $1,600. That is a big increase in costs for me when I am on low wages. But average weekly earnings in Oz right now is $50,000 per year and so the change is quite affordable for those on average wages; they just give up some small luxury. But some folks would like to machine gun anyone who raises costs and foists a change on them. Some of these horrid folks will have kids who resent they were born and they'll carry on the arsole traditions. Patrick Turner. fs **Ian |
|
#28
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 10, 11:22*pm, Peter Wieck wrote:
On Nov 10, 3:39*am, "Ian Iveson" wrote: At the root of all this is a basic question of philosophy, about the relationship between quality and quantity of life. Given the choice, what kind of things should we consider when trading one for the other? We could decide to have no children, stuff ourselves stupid with all the earth's resources, and use our valve amps to the end. Or we could be miserly and miserable ****ers for eons. Mpffff... Not hardly the way it works. The purpose of any given species is to prepare the way for the next species just a little better at competing for that particular ecological niche. At present we are preparing for a species that will survive a high-carbon atmosphere with a high relative humidity, higher sea-levels - but slightly less salt concentration, a greater amount of sulphur and various other gaseous products-of-combustion around as well as various analogous solids - mercury, cadmium and similar. The planet has gone from primarily soft life, to exoskeletons to backbones, from cold blooded to warm blooded, from copper-based blood to iron-based, and each form of life got pretty complicated before it was displaced as the dominant form. And each form of life tried different approaches - size, quantity, speed, only relatively recently brains. All humans are doing is accelerating the process very slightly. And all we are doing is relocating the various elements from one form and location to another, discounting the miniscule amounts being shot into space of course. So, we best serve our purpose by behaving exactly as we do - and pretty much as every other species does - reproduce like mad, use it up and stop adapting, stop changing, stop evolving. Once that happens as a species we are doomed - after which it is only a matter of time. And as one would put down a beloved pet when it is clear that it is in pain and cannot be made better - we should more-or-less treat ourselves the same way. And make way for our replacements in the next several million years or so - a tiny fraction of time as the earth measures things anyway. Keeping always in mind that nature does not particularly care about intelligence except as a way for a species to dominate its niche a little bit better. But the right virus at the right moment proves how little brains really mean in the scheme of things. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA Indeed history teaches us a lot. Most folks don't want to see our species having to be put down because its unviable or in serious pain. But death has to faced by all of us. The polititions can only offer a side show really, temporary amusement and higher electricity bills. So many people will just do business as usual because the cost of change is worse that status quo. Polititians cannot overcome the FU2 philosophy which so many believe in. I think genetic engineering could allow a huge increase in speed of evolution which would enable us to counter the anthropocentric effect we are having on climate. Rich people will be able to afford it. One could have a world with only 10% of present bio-diversity. It seems to me we are changing the world much faster than any species can evolve to addapt to the changes. Intelligence has led us here and it seems stupid. I can't stop any of it. Patrick Turner. |
|
#29
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, so let'sstick to GZ34 worship!
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming.
Tha adoration of the GZ34 is a better use of our time than wittering on about global warming, something that didn't happen, isn't happening, and very likely will not happen, and if it did happen would be entirely beneficial in feeding the world's hungry. Some people really need a lot of help to put their minds in gear. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
|
#30
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 11, 11:51*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Some people really need a lot of help to *put their minds in gear. Yes, Andre, they do. And you most definitely are the first and best example of that need as it applies to this group anyway. What passes for your mind is well-and-truly made up. No need to confuse you with any facts. However, you also very much make my point - which is as you so aptly demonstrate - that humans have reached an evolutionary dead-end. And every species that has reached that point has the responsibility to eliminate itself from the planet as quickly and efficiently as possible. There is no such thing as "harm" in that process as its replacement will simply evolve to meet the prevailing conditions. Expedience and speed are the requirements. You are contributing to that very nicely, thank you! Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#31
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 10, 7:39*pm, "Ian Iveson"
wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: In our days of carbon emissions reduction frenzy design, possession, sale and operation of 120W class A (!) tube amplifiers shall be made illegal... Go class D, use headphones, not just good ideas, that the LAW. :-) BTW, our eurocrats have already outlawed 100W incandescent light bulbs... If you read what James Lovelock has to say about greenhouse heating of the Planet in his latest book, you will see that we are already well into the danger zone. **Only if you believe he knows the truth. Are you sure he said we are, rather than possibly, or probably? It's hardly an exact science. It is not good propoganda to say that we are already beyond some point of no return, obviously, coz ppl will give up and redouble their profligacy. May as well die happy. We are a species that fouls its own nest, and does too little too late to avoid a problem that is slow to affect us. **Everything fouls its own nest. We had a nice caustic atmosphere until it was trashed by a previous bunch of witless organisms. I recall the dinosaurs went for many millions of years before fouling their own nest. Then after the asteroid 65 million yrs ago the dinos mostly diminished, and nothing much upset the atmosphere until man evolved and began to need 2kWH 24/7 to have a good life. Anyway, the amps I have just made consume about 500W when used. But the switch many ppl are making towards "digital" amplifiers, class D, which are 96% efficient is offsetting the effect steam engines that I am still making in tiny numbers. I didn't have any children which is the worst thing anyone could do to a planet. **LOL, which is rare here, for me. Ask not what our children can do for our planet, but what our planet can do for our children. Having none, perhaps you have missed the point? I sure missed having kids. But the C word amoung the shielas I met is "Committment", and none knew the meaning of the word. There is a possibility that today's children will grow to understand global warming better than their parents. Perhaps they might be prepared to do more about stopping CO2 emissions. But the probability of the possibility of the next generations doing much about CO2 is rather gloomy IMHO. You'll never be able to talk your missus into having a cold shower to prevent CO2 emissions, right? For each green minded person there might be 2 who don't care what happens and 3 who go by the FU2 idea and care only to own a 10 room house, and make lotsa money to pay for a grossly polluting lifestyle while cheering the boys with chain saws ripping down forests and causing mahem and mass extinctions. They will believe we are entitled to business as usual and God is on their side. Patrick Turner. |
|
#32
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 12, 3:51*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming. Tha adoration of the GZ34 is a better use of our time than wittering on about global warming, something that didn't happen, isn't happening, and very likely will not happen, and if it did happen would be entirely beneficial in feeding the world's hungry. Some people really need a lot of help to *put their minds in gear. I admit that there is a possibility of a range of probabilities coming true about greenhouse warming. I recall the doomsayers of the 1960s saying that by now there would be mass starvations caused by limited food supplies. But the green revolution occurred and rice yields doubled per hectare. As the world continues getting richer and wealthier and as more energy is used by mechanised farming, more food should get produced and more ppl will eat meat. GM crops will boost food values. But perhaps there is a limit to such progress. There is talk of having 50million ppl in Oz within 50 years. Maybe we then could not export any food. We may have to rely on desalination for water. I would prefer to see alternatives to fossil fuel burning. Nuclear looks well to me. If we had Thorium based fission reactors or we eventually got fusion reactors to work then farewell and good riddance to the coal industry IMHO. But vested interests in the current status quo are screaming like stuck pigs when ppl say let's do away with the coal industry and the oil industry. Carbon trading looks set to be a huge swindle. CO2 sequestration looks unlikely to be successful. Adelaide has just had 5 spring days with over 35C which has set a record since records began in about 1880. And we don't eve have an Elnino drought condition. Its been a very nice spring here with nice rainfall which I have not seen for about 9 years at least. There is a line across the map of Sth Oz called the Goyder Line which denotes where farming north of the line is unviable, and south is OK. I expect to see the line move south. I am discussing the use of SMPS for tube amps with a friend again. Maybe the discussions bear fruit. Almost anything is better than a GZ34. So while some might adore GZ34, others like myself would think they kneel at a fool's altar. If I could cram a SMPS into a steel box about 220mm W x 140mm H x 120mm L, then that would replace the heavy costly PT I currently use and I would have something more desirable to own and use. Halcro amps which arguably are the best solid state class AB amps available have SMPS and they are not noisy. If every tube amp dumped the GZ34 technology out of their design it would make tube amps easier to own and not degrade the sound. Patrick Turner. |
|
#33
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
GZ34 worship!
On Nov 13, 12:21*am, Patrick Turner wrote:
For each green minded person there might be 2 who don't care what happens and 3 who go by the FU2 idea and care only to own a 10 room house, and make lotsa money to pay for a grossly polluting lifestyle while cheering the boys with chain saws ripping down forests and causing mahem and mass extinctions. They will believe we are entitled to business as usual and God is on their side. Oh, I dunno. I expect that God is pretty much indifferent to this planet and its contents - it is all part of the bigger plan, after all. As to 'greeness' that is a moving target. Start with "things" - the range from houses to cloths: a) The greenest 'thing' is one that already exists. b) Any new "thing" requires resources to make it, care to keep it, and somewhere to put it when it is 'done'. This is called 'life-cycle cost'. c) Recycling has a cost - in many cases the cost is lower than the alternative. In very nearly equally many the cost is equivalent to the alternative. In very few, the alternative is both the wisest and most green decision. Metals are category 1. Plastics wood, vegetable matter and paper materials are category 2. Some are amenable to recycling as similar products, some may become biofuels by distillation, some may be burnt directly as fuel. Some chemicals (which likely should never had been made in the first place) are category 3. d) No 'thing' may be viewed at a single moment. It must be viewed across its entire life-cycle. So, windmills are very good 'things' as they last a long time, don't cost very much and don't need much care and use simple technology. Yes, there is cost in mining and refining the materials going into them - but per category 1 above much may be from existing sources, and when 'done' may be readily recycled. Solar (photovoltaic) panels are very bad 'things' as they are costly to install, costly to make and refine the materials, cannot be recycled and have a limited life. Even with subsidies their so-called 'payback' period is anything from 10 - 15 years. Without subsidies, they never pay back due to those nasty life-cycle costs. e) Similarly early-version hybrid vehicles. Making and disposing of those batteries is a nasty process. It is getting better - but that is a lagging technology. Better than gasoline - but not yet perfect. So, as we look towards acquiring 'things' for the good life - we need to make some choices. Do we buy our living 'thing' in a new development (very likely on farmland) made with new materials (however efficient)? Or do we buy an existing 'thing' that has never been on farmland but may not be as efficient as that new 'thing'? The existing 'thing' is far greener than any new 'thing' in this case by any measure. Even if bigger/smaller/whatever than the alternative new 'thing'. Follow that logic through all the rest of the 'things' we use in our daily lives. Do we restrict our life-style based on not wanting to use 'things' that we feel are not so green, or do we do what we wish but with care and acknowlegement of the footprints we leave? The former may (but not necessarily will) lead to bitterness, resentment, provincialism, self- righteousness and ignorance. The latter may be less 'green', but might (not necessarily will) make us happier (and therefore better) people. All our choices on 'things' have implications. And all that is required is that when we make such choices we understand them. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#34
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 13, 5:49*am, Patrick Turner wrote:
On Nov 12, 3:51*pm, Andre Jute wrote: There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming. Tha adoration of the GZ34 is a better use of our time than wittering on about global warming, something that didn't happen, isn't happening, and very likely will not happen, and if it did happen would be entirely beneficial in feeding the world's hungry. Some people really need a lot of help to *put their minds in gear. I admit that there is a possibility of a range of probabilities coming true about greenhouse warming. The main one being that it is a lie and always was a lie/ For many centuries during the Medieval Warm Period, the earth was much warmer than it is now. For two and a half centuries during the Little Ice Age the earth was much colder than it is now. The earth hasn't recovered from the Litle Ice Age yet. The Global Warmies tried to lie these historical facts out of existence with statistical tricks, now exposed; this is the notorious Hockey Stick Scam which by statistical incompetence and trickey flattened the peak of the MWP and the trough of the LIA in an attempt to make the 1990s look very warm. The models built with those lies failed retrospectively to fit the temperature data. How can anyone expect such incompetent models to predict anything. The models built with those lies failed to predict the cooling period in the very next decade. How can anyone believe that such incompetent models can predict a hundred or three hundred years ahead? Note that I'm not just jumping on a bandwagon and kicking a dog that's already down, as you are, Patrick; I've sent these climate alarmists, including the global warmies, up rotten since I was a precocious teenager with a column in the Sunday Times and they were screeching first about the hole in the ozone layer (where is it?) and then about the imminent ice age (missed that one too!), and then changed course and tried to pretend Hell burns on earth. I recall the doomsayers of the 1960s saying that by now there would be mass starvations caused by limited food supplies. But the green revolution occurred and rice yields doubled per hectare. As the world continues getting richer and wealthier and as more energy is used by mechanised farming, more food should get produced and more ppl will eat meat. GM crops will boost food values. But perhaps there is a limit to such progress. There is talk of having 50million ppl in Oz within 50 years. Maybe we then could not export any food. We may have to rely on desalination for water. "Perhaps". Perhaps isn't science. "There is talk of..." Among idiots who want to sound clever there is always talk. That isn't science either. 50m people in Oz wouldn't affect food exports one once, man. You live in Canberra, you can go ask the figures and read them for yourself, instead of wasting your time on the net looking like the victim of every passing apocalyptic fad. I would prefer to see alternatives to fossil fuel burning. Nuclear looks well to me. If we had Thorium based fission reactors or we eventually got fusion reactors to work then farewell and good riddance to the coal industry IMHO. Hallelujah! But vested interests in the current status quo are screaming like stuck pigs when ppl say let's do away with the coal industry and the oil industry. They will be the first to invest in nuclear energy. Carbon trading looks set to be a huge swindle. Of course it is. Fat Al Gore, pinup boy of the environmentalists, designed it as a bigger bonanza for the ruling classes than Prohibition. Fat Boy is the Joe Kennedy of our generation, a "respectable" criminal. CO2 sequestration looks unlikely to be successful. And you couldn't forecast that? Besides, it was unnecessary and probably counterproductive. Adelaide has just had 5 spring days with over 35C which has set a record since records began in about 1880. After all these years mostly in the green and beloved isle, I hate it in Adelaide, my other home, when it gets that hot. I like the winter in Adelaide; feels warm to me, and more even-tempered than the South of France. And we don't eve have an Elnino drought condition. Its been a very nice spring here with nice rainfall which I have not seen for about 9 years at least. There is a line across the map of Sth Oz called the Goyder Line which denotes where farming north of the line is unviable, and south is OK. I expect to see the line move south. Here we go again. Everything gets better and better, year by year. Despite a hugely larger population, there are 300m fewer hungry people in the world, but the usual clowns are rubbing ashes on their heads and, global warming being dead, finding something else to whine about. I am discussing the use of SMPS for tube amps with a friend again. Maybe the discussions bear fruit. Almost anything is better than a GZ34. So while some might adore GZ34, others like myself would think they kneel at a fool's altar. Switch mode power supplies for hi-fi... Excuse me while I vomit. Pinkostinko will crawl out the grave to kiss you on the lips, my man. The GZ34 is the rectifier of reference for people with culture. The only thing that comes close is the Svetlana (blessed be her memory) 6D22S and you need to set up two of those, which is rough on real estate on your amp and on the pocket for the exta filament supply. GZ32 is also super but now far too pricey. If I could cram a SMPS into a steel box about 220mm W x 140mm H x 120mm L, then that would replace the heavy costly PT I currently use and I would have something more desirable to own and use. Halcro amps which arguably are the best solid state class AB amps available have SMPS and they are not noisy. *If every tube amp dumped the GZ34 technology out of their design it would make tube amps easier to own and not degrade the sound. You're nuts. This is the old, old story of excessive negative feedback chopping up the sound all over again, but this time starting in the power supply, which -- as I keep saying -- is part of the sonic transfer function. A whole amp full of fractional artifacts of fractional artifacts piggybacking on each other, necessitating more NFB, which creates more fractionak residuals which piggyback yet more fractional residuals until the sound is entirely articial. A punctiliously built poor idea is always a poor idea, like NFB was all along; that it has triumphed in the market place does not improve a bad idea. You done good by hi-fi electronics, Patrick. If you're bored with what you've achieved, give hi-fi a rest, find something else to do to recharge the batteries. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
|
#35
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 13, 3:54*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Of course it is. Fat Al Gore, pinup boy of the environmentalists, designed it as a bigger bonanza for the ruling classes than Prohibition. Fat Boy is the Joe Kennedy of our generation, a "respectable" criminal. Evidence for this claim? Or is it so important for lunatics like yourself to emotionally coalesce around lies that you'll just fix the facts afterward? |
|
#36
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 13, 10:08*pm, landotter wrote:
On Nov 13, 3:54*pm, Andre Jute wrote: Of course it is. Fat Al Gore, pinup boy of the environmentalists, designed carbon credits as a bigger bonanza for the ruling classes than Prohibition. Fat Boy is the Joe Kennedy of our generation, a "respectable" criminal. Evidence for this claim? Or is it so important for lunatics like yourself to emotionally coalesce around lies that you'll just fix the facts afterward? You get all insulting because I say Fat Al Gore is FAT? Sheet, Maxine, you must be blind as well as impressionable: Let's give you an eyetest. In this piccy, which FATTY is Greedyguts Al Gore? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eat-th...e%20queen..JPG And once more, is the FAT guy on the left "Steal Big" Al Gore or is he Fat Hanging Chad? http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/image...0DE%20NIRO.JPG Everybody's been laughing at Fat Al and his Church of Global Warming Impressionables: "Remember Al Gore? He was Vice President for a little while. Now, he is teaching school at Columbia, teaching a journalism class. Since the election the guy has put on 40 pounds. It's gotten so bad that every time he turns around, his ass erases the blackboard. ... He got on the scales today and demanded a recount." --David Letterman "Gore's so fat, Clinton is thinking of hitting on him." --from David Letterman's "Top Ten Responses To The Question, 'How Fat Is Al Gore?'" "And you can tell Gore's serious when he talks about the world ending because he eats everything in sight." --Jimmy Kimmel "If any of you at home are wondering about the former vice president's seeming largeness ... Here's an inconvenient truth: cake isn't a food group" --Jon Stewart Enjoy, Maxine, enjoy! Andre Jute Charisma is the art of infuriating the undeserving by merely existing elegantly |
|
#37
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, so let's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 23:15:14 -0600, flipper wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:49:49 -0800 (PST), Patrick Turner wrote: On Nov 12, 3:51*pm, Andre Jute wrote: There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming. Tha adoration of the GZ34 is a better use of our time than wittering on about global warming, something that didn't happen, isn't happening, and very likely will not happen, and if it did happen would be entirely beneficial in feeding the world's hungry. Some people really need a lot of help to *put their minds in gear. I admit that there is a possibility of a range of probabilities coming true about greenhouse warming. There is, currently, not even a working hypothesis for man induced CO2 'global warming', much less a theory, and speculation is not science. You really should keep up with the news. Since 1998 it is global cooling. So all the so-called models are being massaged. d |
|
#38
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Flipper says, "Calling CO2 driven AGW 'science' is
a farce." Andre Jute: The main one being that global warming is a lie and always was a lie/ !Jones: Apparently, the world's scientists disagree with the world's bicyclists... and visa versa. Jute: Here are a couple of engineers making a longer-view contribution to the posts by me and Patrick Turner that set this off: ***** FROM flipper : Jute: There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming. Tha adoration of the GZ34 is a better use of our time than wittering on about global warming, something that didn't happen, isn't happening, and very likely will not happen, and if it did happen would be entirely beneficial in feeding the world's hungry. Patrick Turner: I admit that there is a possibility of a range of probabilities coming true about greenhouse warming. Flipper: There is, currently, not even a working hypothesis for man induced CO2 'global warming', much less a theory, and speculation is not science. Don Pearce: You really should keep up with the news. Since 1998 it is global cooling. So all the so-called models are being massaged. Flipper: I have kept up with the news and whether the models are changed or not doesn't alter the fact there is no working hypothesis for man made CO2 induced "climate change" if that makes you feel better. Btw, the 'official' line is there has NOT been a 'cooling' because the 1998 hi is anomalous or a 'false' hi. Which didn't stop them from using it as 'evidence' of global warming back then but, nonetheless, it's anomalous. It all depends on how you construct the trend lines but if cherry picked well enough, and 'anomalies corrected', they manage to claim a 'slight' (worst case flat) warming not as much as the previous but 'probably' (wave arms) just a 'pause' till it resumes even worse than before despite there being not one shred of evidence to support the speculation. However, even if it did 'resume' we're no where near planetary 'highs' for either temperature OR C02 and the only reason AGW pinheads imagine so is because they actually think 150 years of measurements, 35 or so if you only count satellites, coming out of a mini ice age means something in a freaking 120,000 year glacial cycle. But despite our best efforts at pumping CO2 into the air this interglacial is no where near the last temperature peak 120,000 years ago, or the previous interglacial cycle peak 240,000 years ago, or the interglacial peak before that one as well as the one before that. All of which occurred without the help, thank you, of Exxon, Mobile, Shell, BP and SUVs. Hell, we're not even at the peak of THIS puny interglacial. That occurred some 8000 years ago, give or take a few centuries. And ALL of that is below the geological average as we're still in the current 55 million year long (so far) glacial period with the last honest to goodness 'warm' period being circa 75 million years ago; and the preceding glacial period wasn't near as cold as this one. You've got to go 3 glacial periods back some 450 million years to find weather this chilly. Oh, btw, CO2 levels were at a massive 4,500 ppm during that 450 million year ago COLD glacial period and 2,000 ppm during the 'not as cold' glacial period 150 million years ago. Colder glacial period with MORE, twice as much, CO2? And if CO2 drove temperature the entire planet should have been a burned cinder instead of in deep glacial periods. Calling CO2 driven AGW 'science' is a farce. **** Jute: Yup. Looks like Flipper agrees with me, there's more science in Scientology than in global warming. For the innocant, Scientology is a religion (i.e. a tax dodge) of green bug-eyed monsters though up by L Ron Hubbard, a sci-fi writer. Andre Jute "Loonies like Asher will continue to shout 'Global Warming' until they suddenly start shouting 'Global Cooling' as if they'd done that from the beginning." -- Tom Kunich "Oh, I've seen the loonies do that for half a century. Asher's problem is that he has such a poor grasp of history, he thinks the New Apocalypse of Global Warming is brand spanking new and exciting." -- Andre Jute |
|
#39
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 14, 1:26*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Pretty much a bunch of self-serving crap. Andre, it is nice to see that you are doing your duty to the universe and also serving as such an excellent example of why it needs be done. To repeat: The human race, as you so fully prove has reached an evolutionary dead end. Lingering further simply impedes its replacement from gaining its rightful place. So, our duty is to wipe ourselves out as completely and quickly as is conceivably possible. Failing that, to do nothing to impede the process. As to damaging the planet in that process - again, repeating: all we are doing is messing about around the edges and shifting a few oxides around here and there. As the earth measures things our pernanent effect is nil and our present value negative. But that we are rendering it useless for ourselves is only a good thing. That we are fouling both our own nest and that of many other planetary shareholders is also of no import, again in a couple of million years all will be forgotten. Keep on as you are - a ranting, brain-damaged little pipsqueak howling from an Irish backwater. You are serving the highest and best use you are able, after all. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#40
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's more science in Scientology than in Global Warming, solet's stick to GZ34 worship!
On Nov 14, 7:36*pm, !Jones wrote:
Well, Jute... when you fling the terms "liar" and "lies" about, I read it as you're trying to evoke my emotion as opposed to informing or persuading me. Nah, Jonesy, I'm too old and too wily to try and persuade sheep of anything. I just lay out the facts for those who want them and eventually there's a tax revolt and the powers that be call me a revolutionary (a travesty, if you ask me; my dinner jacket fits better than theirs) and send assassins after me. I have laid out the evidence that Michael Mann, the lead writer of a key IPCC report, lied. On this conference. Google up "Hockey Stick" and you will find the evidence given by leading members of the US National Academy of Science before the US Senate. I'm surprised you speak out before gathering facts, Jonesy; it's a very unprofessional thing for a university professor to do. The world's scientists are (sort of) coming to a consensus that contradicts your position. * Science is not about consensus, it's about proof. Global warming, as Flipper says, doesn't even have a hypothesis, never mind proof. All it has is scare stories and computer models that don't forecast ****. There are certainly a few voices of dissention. * You mean "dissent". Or "a few dissenting voices". My point is that an intelligent reader would not be convinced by your use of loaded language (i.e.: "liars") that the scientific community has it all wrong. Who says the "scientific community" has it all wrong? You? Certainly not me! In fact, my proofs that the bureaucrats at the IPCC and some climatologists have lied, are lying, and intend to go on lying, depends primarily on a cross-displinary analysis of contrary data. Look up the thread in which Ben Wiener, on this conference, tried to lie to me that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age are only "eurocentric", at which point I published 37 peer-reviewed references from a double handful of sciences that gave that bull**** the lie and proved, and still proves, that the MWP and the LIA circled the globa. I'm not a climatologist, so I don't know. This isn't about climatology. This is about lies so-called scientists make proxy statistics perform at the behest of IPCC bureaucrats. I'm a statistician (economists and psychologists are just statisticians with a spot more class and imagination than mere technicians) who was once paid a seven-figure sum (before bonuses of several times that) every year for being a very, very smart boy with numbers. What I can make numbers do, I can also spot crooks who call themselves scientists doing. So can other first-class statisticians, among them McIntyre & McKittrick, who for exposing the Hockey Stick as a sham should have had the Nobel Prize given to that clown Al Gore. *I do know that a vast majority of the climatologists disagree with you... Ah, here we go: consensus! Actually, there isn't consensus, merely a meretricious claim by bureaucrats at the IPCC that there is consensus. And consensus isn't science, Jonesy, it is bought by money and power. Read a little scientific history. Lysenko is a good place to start. He killed tens of millions of people by starvation. In a couple of decades, I'm going to label you a genocide for supporting this global warming scare, same as I labelled Rachel Carson and all her followers, including some by name on RBT, genocides for the pointless banning of DDT, which too was done on the basis of hysteria without an iota of scientific proof. (Look up DDT on this conference if you want to see how I made that point stick.) and you're shrieking about it! *That's not likely to convince anyone. I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm just having fun tweaking the noses of the global warming faithful, same way I tweak the noses of the anti-evolutionist fundies. When I want to convince you, you won't even know you've been convinced. You're talking to a premium-grade hidden persauder. Those statistics I mentioned above as so valuable, I did them in advertising. Let's say that I were persuaded; what, exactly, do you want me to *do*? * Gee, and they let you teach unformed minds! Yo, Jonesy, there's sure to be a Politics 101 somewhere in your college. Go sit in. When you've got the point, then write to your Congressman as follows: "I am not convinced that global warming is a real and present danger. The cost of Kyoto alone is in the trillions already. For that much we can raise the poor of the world out of their misery by giving them food, clean water, basic health care and primary education. If instead we spend the money on a hubristic attempt to control a natural force, in a very short time sharp intellectuals will call us genocidal fools. If you vote for such a waste of money, I shall no longer be able to vote for you. Yours sincerely, Jonesy." Is reducing our use of fossil fuels a *bad* thing? * Not at all. But common economy or even prudence doesn't make it an imperative. What is bad, what is indeed racist, is for us to insist that brown and black peoples trying to industrialize must stay poor forever so that they do not produce carbon. This is very hard for Americans to understand but is the official position of the Chinese and the Indians and others. Did you know that your government is racist, Jonesy? Should I drive more? * Of course you should: you might learn to drive better and be less of a danger to cyclists. (BTW, I haven't owned a car since 1992. I'm a very great deal greener than you will ever be.) Will that help the situation? * Of course not. Your question merely illustrates your ignorance. Carbon is a natural gas, a very small fraction of the greenhouse gases that so upset the doom-mongers. Without carbon, plants will die, then humans and other oxygen-breathers will die. The human-created CO2 is the tiniest fraction of a subfraction. Even if we controlled it, and we can't, it would make no difference whatsoever. As Flipper pointed out, as I have pointed out on this conference many times, there is no scientific proof that CO2 is linked to global temperature. In fact, in the ice core record, rising temperature precedes CO2 increase. You might equally, with more visible proof, say that temperature rise causes CO2 increases. If you were actually to look into the correlation of global temperature rise, you would discover it is statistically closely linked to sunspot activity. But sunspot activity doesn't have any guilt button to press, and automobiles and consumption already carry that burden of aeons of Christian guilt inculcation for the would-be controllers of our lives, the environmentalists, to work on. Why are you trying so hard to convince me? * I've told you, I'm just pushing the buttons of the global warming fundies. It just seems hard to you because you haven't grasped yet that I don't take prisoners. If you're right, then what difference does it make whether or not I choose to reduce my carbon footprint? None. However, if I'm wrong, and global warming is caused by your CO2 emissions, you should produce a bigger carbon footprint so that the temperature can rise two degrees, which would increase agricultural output and thus feed the world's hungry. That too is in an IPCC report. (It appears that I'm the only one who has actually read the literature. The rest of these clowns, and you apparently, take their "facts" from television.) *Is carbon dioxide accumulation a good thing? The Earth is very good at carbon accumulation. What do you think oil and coal is, what do you think fuels the trees and plants that provide our oxygen? Jones P.S. *Please do not cross post into other newsgroups; that reflects poor Usenet manners, IMO. Something else you should learn, Jonesy. Your opinion doesn't matter to me. I'll do what I'm going to do regardless of whether you think it is good netiquette, and sooner or later my version will become the rule. So save your breath; I'm not in the least interested in conforming to your lowest common denominator view of how one should behave. In any event, this part of this thread, which I merely gave the name of an RBT thread, *originated on RAT*, and I crossposted it to RBT because many cyclists are interested in global warming and might have informative input. *I trimmed the headers for a reason... Whatever quivers your wick, pal. I don't know squat about audio tubes and don't want to pester those nice people with our off-topic discussion. Eh? Wakey, wakey, Jonesy; this discussion originated on rec.audio.tubes. And now you arrogantly want to assume the right to deprive them of it? Bit dictatorial, aren't you, Jonesy? Sounds like you've taught college too long, sport. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Supreme Court Worship Comes First With Respectable Conservatives | Audio Opinions | |||
| Keith's hatred of effective worship experiences. | Audio Opinions | |||
| Sluttie's worship of the Krooborg | Audio Opinions | |||
| FA: NOS GZ34 | Vacuum Tubes | |||
| weekly recording of worship service (speaking / music) | Pro Audio | |||
![Engineer[_2_] is offline](images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
