Show Posts

46

The Lounge / Re: currently salmon is worth more than crude oil

« on: January 26, 2016, 02:44:46 PM »

Quote from: Liam on January 26, 2016, 02:26:58 PM

Ash-ridden air so thick you can barely breathe or see six inches in front of you has no impact on anything whatsoever

the only time it's EVER like that is in the summer, which has absolutely nothing to do with woodstoves.

thanks for playing though

47

The Lounge / Re: currently salmon is worth more than crude oil

« on: January 26, 2016, 05:29:46 AM »

Quote from: Cole on January 25, 2016, 07:38:39 PM

Wow. Just wow.

Speaking of the military doing shit in the US, did they take over Texas when Jade Helm happened? No? They didn't? Oh, ok.

This is just like when you dropped a bunch of 4chan references in order to insinuate that I'm some sort of 4chan user/loser/bad person.

"Oh, ok"

Were you expecting some sort of takeover plot/event? Why are you acting like I was? I wasn't, and I never posted anything of the sort. Many other people in other places did, sure, but not me, not here or anywhere. Why are you acting like I or anyone else here did?

People were concerned about massive displays of incremental militarization, and idiots like you have been acting like they were all saying the sky is falling/the end is near/doomsday/rapture/etc... only referencing the craziest theories instead of the actual valid complaints/concerns, as if your assertion, or your interpretation; that jade helm = dramatic military takeover, obviously not coming to fruition, is somehow proof that all of their very real concerns were crazy/wrong/dismissable...

stop projecting, asshole.

48

The Lounge / Re: currently salmon is worth more than crude oil

« on: January 26, 2016, 04:59:45 AM »

Quote from: JFax on January 26, 2016, 04:32:45 AM

makes sense in your area.

Oh, so you've solved the trucking it in VS pipeline VS other/cheaper/more available fuels debates. Mountains, rivers, idling diesel engines, entire city works/infrastructure projects be damned, you've figured it out...

Quote from: JFax on January 26, 2016, 04:32:45 AM

Artificial controlled forest fires in an area prone for forest fires

accidental/surprise fires that affect residential areas are different from actual deliberately-set controlled burns in isolated areas. Can you understand that? I'm not talking about controlled burns, I'm talking about the artillery ranges and other army stuff that admittedly, repeatedly accidentally starts massive fires, which make our air yellower/stinkier than any time ever in the winter when woodstoves are in use, which is never accounted for in any of the "air quality" legislation.

I understand you're just trying to insult me, but stop acting retarded. It (here anyways) very openly/clearly has nothing to do with banning 'open fires' or preventing the spread of fire, it's about air quality/cleanliness. Clean air, not fires. They aren't implementing burn bans when it's -15 and there's 3 feet of snow covering everything because of the chance of wildfires, they're doing it because they say the air quality is bad.

I swear to god bikeguide is still the worst website I've ever been a part of as far as people deliberately twisting what I write

49

The Lounge / Re: currently salmon is worth more than crude oil

« on: January 25, 2016, 07:12:27 PM »

Quote from: LeonLikesToRock on January 25, 2016, 06:13:15 PM

Do you guys have a problem with fires

in the summer, yes, but this has nothing to do with fire danger. Burn-ban or not the army regularly 'accidentally' sets massive fires and gets away with it. Air quality/visibility in the summer can be HORRIBLE but you never hear about anyone paying for it. It's about controlling peoples' heat source in the winter.

Quote from: LeonLikesToRock on January 25, 2016, 06:13:15 PM

or are you just being bent over?

If nature doesn't do it every summer, the army regularly starts massive fires that destroy homes/properties, displacing many people, disrupting everyday life, and very much negatively affecting the tourism industry, not to mention the air quality.

But smokey/smoggy skies in the winter are an excuse for the legislature to ruin/take more homes, and they're doing it...

We voted against the measures they want to enforce, and they started implementing them anyways saying the voters "misunderstood the morals of clean air" or some garbage...

50

The Lounge / Re: currently salmon is worth more than crude oil

« on: January 25, 2016, 04:11:11 PM »

Vehicles are already driving around with imaging stuff/'sniffers'/air quality testers on the roofs.

Also aerial imaging, but they don't talk about that.

Heavily-advertised programs, which are voluntary at first, involving turning in your neighbors/the 'offenders,' have been announced/in place for years now, and they're digging in, not giving up.
The city I live in is part of a natural valley/bowl. Cold temperatures/inversion + all the vehicles/furnaces in that bowl means poor air quality. But it's being twisted as a human/wood-caused-phenomenon and they're taxing people for it, with the stated intention to ramp up that 'pressure.'
A few years ago we were described worldwide as one of the worst cities in the country as far as air quality - even higher than NYC and places in china - based on totally contrived/misrepresented numbers. Not because we actually are bad, but because they're trying to force some bullshit through. And it's very clear to anyone actually watching it.

And nevermind the gigantic wildfires/opaque skys the army starts every summer...

"Voluntary burn bans." Roadsigns stating this all over the place now.

It starts with fines. failure to pay a fine leads to... what?

they've already had woodstove buy-back programs where they've destroyed many modern/clean/highly-efficient/expensive stoves, instead of donating them to places using dirtier/worse/more expensive equipment. Counter-intuitive by definition, criminal if you have common sense...

pretty sure there are countless other ways they could claim to be enforcing violations, all the way down to stealing the king's wood

51

The Bike Shop / Re: 3D printed titanium parts

« on: January 25, 2016, 02:51:16 PM »

Van Nicholas‘ ti stem prototypes

http://www.bikerumor.com/2015/11/04/mega-roundup-2-more-weird-and-wonderful-bikes-from-europe-beyond/
http://www.gyro.fr/T_GYRO/PDF/Catalogue-Van-Nicholas-2014.pdf

52

The Lounge / currently salmon is worth more than crude oil

« on: January 25, 2016, 02:43:08 PM »

I GUARANTEE you they're going to fuck this up.

Meanwhile they're shoving natural gas up our asses before we even have a supply line or any infrastructure, far-exceeding any of their cost estimates, criminalizing woodstove users, and taking crazy aggressive actions against people using the waterways or doing anything that has to do with fish...

53

The Bike Shop / Re: 3D printed titanium parts

« on: January 24, 2016, 03:39:14 PM »

http://dustinmbailey.com/littlecassini

the seatstay welds on this one look as good as the dropout welds on the last one of theirs I posted...

https://twitter.com/ideas2cycles
Jan 20 "We made a tech demo showcasing the possibilities of binder jetting technology"

the seatstay/toptube junction really reminds me of 2004ish haro nyquists, and I know they had a race frame that was even more similar...

54

The Lounge / Re: I come to visit my old friends and talk about a let down.

« on: January 21, 2016, 04:13:05 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjpLLM8jOXc

please sell me your rnc fullguard...

55

The Bike Shop / Re: 3D printed titanium parts

« on: January 18, 2016, 05:07:11 PM »

yeah it bugged me too. I think they cut the seat/chainstays too short, or did the dropout/stay angles wrong or something, and there might not be enough tire/seatube clearance to shorten it any

56