1. Home
  2. Garden Forum
  3. Global warming?
  4. Page 3

Global warming?

The message from "James" contains these words:

Wrong again

Britain's conversion to natural gas began in 68 and was completed by 1977.

formatting link
Janet (Scotland, UK)

Reply to
Janet Baraclough
Loading thread data ...

I wondered if anybody got that. Thanks for your support...

Mr. Bill

Reply to
Mr. Bill

Whs the pun intentional? I got a good laugh out of it even if it wasn't. He He heated response...

Mr. Bill

Reply to
Mr. Bill

We must be talking about two different things. Your link mentions switching from "town gas" to natural gas in homes. I have been talking about switching from coal fired electrical plants to gas powered electrical plants.

formatting link

Reply to
James

place? Must be a better way

-- golddog

Reply to
golddog

Reply to
presley

Hmmm. Quite an interesting opinion you have of scientists. To bring this back to rec.gardens, I suppose you believe that if gardeners in the arctic want to grow palms out of doors, or if gardeners in the tropics want to grow delphiniums as perennials, scientists will leap out of the woodwork to prove that it can easily be done, just because there are people who desire those results? Why don't we posit those two theories as "trial balloons" and see how much "traction" they get?

Reply to
presley

The message from golddog contains these words:

No, I'm seeing i the full thread in perfect order with no confusion whatever. I use a free newsreader supplied by my isp, but there are countless other newsreaders to choose from.

Yes, using a newsreader, the intended format to access this medium.

You are reading this through a website portal at www.gardenbanter You probably imagine this discussion is taking place on that website, but you are mistaken. The discussion is taking place in a different place on the internet, called usenet, in something called a newsgroup. You aren't even seeing all of it (because gardebanter doesnt collect all the posts) and you aren't seeing it properly threaded because gardenbanter is at fault..

You are in the same position as someone who stands on the street in the rain, looking through the window of a TV shop, watching the program on their sets. You can't even adjust what's on the screens, let alone hear all that's being said. But you really believe that gardenbanter, who generously let you stand on the pavement, is the TV producer who made the program you're watching through the shop window. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Janet.

Reply to
Janet Baraclough

The message from "James" contains these words:

Our "town gas" was from coal. So, when you talked about Britain's conversion to natural gas, I thought you meant what that term means here... the huge national conversion project from coal-gas to natural gas. That's where we got our wires crossed. Let's try again

You wrote " Britain started out pretty well when they converted to natural gas (snips) The conversion occurred in the early 90s."

Don't interpret that to mean Britain ceased coal-fired power generation in the 90's. Britain continues to use coal-fired power stations to generate electricity , though we do also use gas, nuclear and hydro power stations, wind-generastion is increasing and wave-power is on its way.

formatting link

Janet

Reply to
Janet Baraclough

Doesn't your news reader show the messages in a hierarchal fashion?

Reply to
Doug Kanter

The message from "Doug Kanter" contains these words:

He's not using a newsreader, he's posting via a cheapskate commercial UK web portal for numpties. Half its members are still trying to work out if this is email or a chatroom.

Janet

Reply to
Janet Baraclough

Sounds similar to AOL Syndrome. Incurable.

Reply to
Doug Kanter

I admit my opinion on scientists have become somewhat cynical over the past few years over the global warming thing. I believe it is an environmental agenda and the environmental movement has become less about environmnet and more about power. They have their own indentured scientists to lend credence to the theory. Former environmentalists have left the orgs because of it.

I also admit the topic got a little out of hand. Especially with the mixup that Janet and I had about gas conversion.

As to trial balloons over what will grow where, knock yourself out. I'll leave that to others.

Reply to
James

"Agenda" has become the latest obscenity. People think the director/producers of the movie "Brokeback Mountain" had an agenda. OK. The owner of my favorite pizza place has an agenda. I have an agenda. You have an agenda.

Reply to
Doug Kanter

golddog wrote: [...]

That's why Usenet early on developed the convention of bottom posting, and of showing the snips. Too many people here top-post, too many people here snip carelessly, etc. Conventions are arbitrary, but that doesn't make them pointless. Spalng's a knvnshn, tuu. (And the only reason you can decipher that is that I'm using a few of the E. spelling conventions.

HTH

Reply to
Wolf Kirchmeir

environmental

If you say so.

Reply to
James

Enjoy your newsreader

-- golddog

Reply to
golddog

Hey.....Who said you could talk about my agenda? *snicker* Murri

Reply to
Lady Blacksword

The message from golddog contains these words:

We have one each. Of course we enjoy them, thankyou; you're the one having a problem reading usent without a newsreader.

Janet

Reply to
Janet Baraclough

the first people on usenet were scientists and email was linear, not packaged like it is now, further messages were THREADED like it is now so we KNOW what the topic of the message is as we scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt all have puters at home and it would sometimes take days before we got an answer to an email so it was pretty easy to forget what the person was talking about. everyone is using readers that THREAD messages, that is line up the posts with the OP first and then replies as they come in, right?

the problem of bottom posting is the nesting sequence....................

last person to post name at top

last persons message

.... a lot of the time the nesting is all screwed up with posting in between the nests and often there is confusion about who said what along with this is the fact that

  1. people rarely snip ANYTHING so the previous messages go on well out of sight and
  2. last persons comment is usually of the "me too" variety .... all this makes me delete the entire post

contrast that with the utter simplicity and cleanness of top posting:

last person to post name at top last persons message

now if, for some reason, the reader DOESNT know what the topic is they can scroll down to the next person they are responding to. OR, they can erase the next person and respond to the first person.

so >golddog wrote:

It is much more logical if it is:

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

Ingrid

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at

formatting link
up:
formatting link
the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the recommendations I make. AND I DID NOT AUTHORIZE ADS AT THE OLD PUREGOLD SITE

Reply to
dr-solo

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.