NAT:All you AGW believers

[ScottW]

are morally compelled to leave the internet.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5489134.ece

Wissner-Gross has also calculated the CO2 emissions caused by individual use
of the internet. His research indicates that viewing a simple web page
generates about 0.02g of CO2 per second. This rises tenfold to about 0.2g of
CO2 a second when viewing a website with complex images, animations or
videos.

A separate estimate from John Buckley, managing director of
carbonfootprint.com, a British environmental consultancy, puts the CO2
emissions of a Google search at between 1g and 10g, depending on whether you
have to start your PC or not. Simply running a PC generates between 40g and
80g per hour, he says. of CO2 Chris Goodall, author of Ten Technologies to
Save the Planet, estimates the carbon emissions of a Google search at 7g to
10g (assuming 15 minutes' computer use).

Nicholas Carr, author of The Big Switch, Rewiring the World, has calculated
that maintaining a character (known as an avatar) in the Second Life virtual
reality game, requires 1,752 kilowatt hours of electricity per year. That is
almost as much used by the average Brazilian.



ScottW

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Another vet appointment skipped, and RAO pays the price.

> are morally compelled to leave the internet.

As usual, Yapper strings together some words from human language that make
no sense in combination. There is no such concept as "morally compelled",
Witless. If you're trying to bark that somebody should feel guilty, I'll
just point out that no right-minded human would take advice on morals or
responsibility from the likes of you.

Now go fetch something and leave us alone.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 11, 7:51*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Another vet appointment skipped, and RAO pays the price.
>
> > are morally compelled to leave the internet.
>
> As usual, Yapper strings together some words from human language that make
> no sense in combination. There is no such concept as "morally compelled",
> Witless. If you're trying to bark that somebody should feel guilty, I'll
> just point out that no right-minded human would take advice on morals or
> responsibility from the likes of you.

Quit oppressing his differing POV.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > Another vet appointment skipped, and RAO pays the price.
> >
> > > are morally compelled to leave the internet.
> >
> > As usual, Yapper strings together some words from human language that make
> > no sense in combination. There is no such concept as "morally compelled",
> > Witless. If you're trying to bark that somebody should feel guilty, I'll
> > just point out that no right-minded human would take advice on morals or
> > responsibility from the likes of you.
>
> Quit oppressing his differing POV.

It's *my* POV that purporting to argue subjects about which one is ignorant
bespeaks a lack of intellectual fortitude. You'd better agree with me on
pain of being 'insulted' for having no 'integrity'.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 12, 2:53*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Jan 11, 9:34*pm, George M. Middius >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Shhhh! said:
>
> > > > Another vet appointment skipped, and RAO pays the price.
>
> > > > > are morally compelled to leave the internet.
>
> > > > As usual, Yapper strings together some words from human language that make
> > > > no sense in combination. There is no such concept as "morally compelled",
> > > > Witless. If you're trying to bark that somebody should feel guilty, I'll
> > > > just point out that no right-minded human would take advice on morals or
> > > > responsibility from the likes of you.
>
> > > Quit oppressing his differing POV.
>
> > It's *my* POV that purporting to argue subjects about which one is ignorant
> > bespeaks a lack of intellectual fortitude. You'd better agree with me on
> > pain of being 'insulted' for having no 'integrity'.
>
> Did you buy a carbon credit before making this post?
> Poor George... offseting his usenet carbon footprint will bankrupt
> him.

Since you didn't address my point we can see that you get your panties
in a bunch when you can't refute that your differing POV is oppressed.