🚀 go-pugleaf

Richard the Driver wrote:

> I forsee a future in photography for you, however, it will be the
> photographing of hypercar - pitslave impacts, these mementos will adorn
> the walls of the squalid hovels pitslaves are shoved into whilst too
> exhausted and malnourished to mine radioactive minerals.

What kind of goddamn liberals do we have running things? They don't get 
hovels. When they're too exhausted and malnourished to mill plutonium, 
they're to be disposed of.

Trust me on this. I know about pitslaves and how to handle them-usually with 
a set of channel-locks.

Mike S. Medintz

scottscottscott wrote:

> Channellocks?  Kee-ryst, what kinda poofter uses Channellocks?  After
> I've "worked" on something, the only tool you can use on it is a
> Vise-Grip; a tool that is made to fix stuff that's too fucked up to
> repair with normal wrenches.

Attention yutz:

Channellocks aren't wrenches. They're pliers, except they don't have any 
springs involved so you need to have some sort of grip strength to use 
them.

They're very useful, for turning things and handling hazardous materials and 
eliciting confessions from suspects.

The Sheriff

"GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> Check us out today...
>
> http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
>
> We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for global
> conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
>
>

        Half of the silver mined in the U.S. is used for
making film.
        Ever see one of the silver mines in the Rockies?
        It's real pretty....

        No, there's nothing wrong with photography.
        But there *is* something wrong with 10's of millions
of people doing it.....

Bruce<+>

Suffering from paranoid delusions, and laboring under the 
misconception that others care about his opinion,

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> 

Vomited on his keyboard, the result follows:

news:<EXJC8.644$p14.308@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> "Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > All the more reason to go Digital.
> >
> 
>    Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
> It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
> facilities are located in different areas.
>     The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
> while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
> 
> 
I forsee a future in photography for you, however, it will be the photographing
of hypercar - pitslave impacts, these mementos will adorn the walls of the
squalid hovels pitslaves are shoved into whilst too exhausted and malnourished
to mine radioactive minerals.

Fuckity fuck fuck - Napalm sticks to enviroweenies

On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
<bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> All the more reason to go Digital.
>>
>
>   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
>It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
>facilities are located in different areas.
>    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
>while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
>
>Bruce<+>

'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.

And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
you from atop your ivory fucking tower.

brad

"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vgnndugeae3ognqk2ku2ci1365e49cmgke@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> All the more reason to go Digital.
> >>
> >
> >   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
> >It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
> >facilities are located in different areas.
> >    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
> >while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
> >
> >Bruce<+>
>
> 'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
> And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.
>
> And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
> about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
> you from atop your ivory fucking tower.
>
> brad
>


    Those are your words above, not mine. And if the
truth offends you, whose fault is that?

Bruce<+>

"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vgnndugeae3ognqk2ku2ci1365e49cmgke@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> All the more reason to go Digital.
> >>
> >
> >   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
> >It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
> >facilities are located in different areas.
> >    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
> >while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
> >
> >Bruce<+>
>
> 'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
> And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.
>
> And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
> about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
> you from atop your ivory fucking tower.
>
> brad
>

       We have to stop trashing the Planet. Whatever it takes to accomplish
this end is what it takes.
        Usually it's a matter of *how* things are done, rather than the
things themselves.
        Eating food from a garden outside your door has
a *tiny* fraction of the environmental impact of the same
foods purchased at Safeway, et al.
        There's nothing wrong with the Internet, per se.

Bruce<+>

On Fri, 10 May 2002 15:11:28 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
<bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:vgnndugeae3ognqk2ku2ci1365e49cmgke@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
>> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> >news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> >> All the more reason to go Digital.
>> >>
>> >
>> >   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
>> >It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
>> >facilities are located in different areas.
>> >    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
>> >while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
>> >
>> >Bruce<+>
>>
>> 'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
>> And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.
>>
>> And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
>> about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
>> you from atop your ivory fucking tower.
>>
>> brad
>>
>
>
>    Those are your words above, not mine. And if the
>truth offends you, whose fault is that?
>
>Bruce<+>

I'm fine with the truth, it's hypocrisy that offends me.

brad
>
>

On Fri, 10 May 2002 15:16:28 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
<bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:vgnndugeae3ognqk2ku2ci1365e49cmgke@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
>> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> >news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> >> All the more reason to go Digital.
>> >>
>> >
>> >   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
>> >It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
>> >facilities are located in different areas.
>> >    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
>> >while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
>> >
>> >Bruce<+>
>>
>> 'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
>> And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.
>>
>> And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
>> about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
>> you from atop your ivory fucking tower.
>>
>> brad
>>
>
>       We have to stop trashing the Planet. Whatever it takes to accomplish
>this end is what it takes.

Very tautological. But here's a serious question. 'Why' do we have to
stop trashing the planet? To what end? What kind of human culture do
you foresee existing on this future 'untrashed' planet? How do you
propose to stop, and then reverse, the entire natural tendencies of
our 'shit in our own bed' race?

It's too late, the trains already left the station. We're fucked, the
planet isn't. It'll get along just fine without us, we are not as
important as you believe. Conservationists complain of our selfish
homocentricity, but it is they who are obsessed with humanity's
importance. We arrived, we'll poison ourselves and much else, and then
we'll leave, the planet doesn't give a fuck, get over it.

brad

"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:mjeodus2et6v5dn3tvqb30emqc2mubab4u@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 15:16:28 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:vgnndugeae3ognqk2ku2ci1365e49cmgke@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
> >> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >> >news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> >> All the more reason to go Digital.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
> >> >It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
> >> >facilities are located in different areas.
> >> >    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new
industries
> >> >while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
> >> >
> >> >Bruce<+>
> >>
> >> 'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
> >> And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.
> >>
> >> And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
> >> about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
> >> you from atop your ivory fucking tower.
> >>
> >> brad
> >>
> >
> >       We have to stop trashing the Planet. Whatever it takes to
accomplish
> >this end is what it takes.
>
> Very tautological. But here's a serious question. 'Why' do we have to
> stop trashing the planet? To what end?


    Because we are a part of Nature, and what we do to
Nature we do to ourselves.
   There's one reason, and a good one.


 What kind of human culture do
> you foresee existing on this future 'untrashed' planet?

    Decentralized synthesis of  'primitive'  'medieval'  and
'modern' technologies....


 How do you
> propose to stop, and then reverse, the entire natural tendencies of
> our 'shit in our own bed' race?
>

    By doing it, the same way one does anything.  If the
old ways aren't working, adopt new ones that look
likely to succeed.....
    The aspects of this culture that are harming the Nature
that we are dependent on must be replaced...


> It's too late, the trains already left the station. We're fucked,


    No.


the
> planet isn't. It'll get along just fine without us, we are not as
> important as you believe.


    We are as important as any other aspect of existence.


 Conservationists complain of our selfish
> homocentricity, but it is they who are obsessed with humanity's
> importance. We arrived, we'll poison ourselves and much else, and then
> we'll leave, the planet doesn't give a fuck, get over it.
>

        I reject your philosophy.  And there will be plenty
of humans around, although the numbers will be small
indeed compared to what they are now, *if* we don't
profoundly change our ways.
        You are obviously a very intelligent person. With
a dose of hope and optimism you could be part of the
solution....
        To give up on the human race is to give up on your-
self.......Not a good idea and certainly not necessary.


> brad
>
>
>

autobaan_cosmonaut@yahoo.co.uk (Richard the Driver) wrote in message > Vomited on his keyboard, the result follows:
> > "Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > > All the more reason to go Digital.
> >    Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
> > It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
> > facilities are located in different areas.
> >     The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
> > while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
> I forsee a future in photography for you, however, it will be the photographing
> of hypercar - pitslave impacts, these mementos will adorn the walls of the
> squalid hovels pitslaves are shoved into whilst too exhausted and malnourished
> to mine radioactive minerals.
> Fuckity fuck fuck - Napalm sticks to enviroweenies

Cob?  Is that you?

Scott

REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


"GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> Check us out today...
>
> http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
>
> We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for global
> conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
>
>

"Mike S. Medintz" <medintz@mindspring.com> wrote 

> Trust me on this. I know about pitslaves and how to handle them-usually with 
> a set of channel-locks.


Channellocks?  Kee-ryst, what kinda poofter uses Channellocks?  After
I've "worked" on something, the only tool you can use on it is a
Vise-Grip; a tool that is made to fix stuff that's too fucked up to
repair with normal wrenches.

Scott

Of course, that means people don't ask me to fix things often.  Heh.

On Fri, 10 May 2002 23:27:43 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
<bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:


>> >       We have to stop trashing the Planet. Whatever it takes to
>accomplish
>> >this end is what it takes.
>>
>> Very tautological. But here's a serious question. 'Why' do we have to
>> stop trashing the planet? To what end?
>
>
>    Because we are a part of Nature, and what we do to
>Nature we do to ourselves.

Of course, but that applies to all species to a lesser degree, we live
in a closed system, so all actions of every member of that system will
impact on other members in some way, no argument there.


> What kind of human culture do
>> you foresee existing on this future 'untrashed' planet?
>
>    Decentralized synthesis of  'primitive'  'medieval'  and
>'modern' technologies....

Well, this statement requires a week to answer!
But come on Bruce, in order for your revised cultural and sociological
system to operate, it would require a large portion of the planets
inhabitants to act in a completely alien way. Mankind would have to
deny all the traits which makes us what we are.
This is like saying 'Well, we could make it work, but we can't start
from here'


> How do you
>> propose to stop, and then reverse, the entire natural tendencies of
>> our 'shit in our own bed' race?
>>
>
>    By doing it, the same way one does anything.  If the
>old ways aren't working, adopt new ones that look
>likely to succeed.....

But here you make the classic category mistake!
The old ways are working! By that I don't mean that everything we do
is correct, I wouldn't insult your intelligence, but I maintain that
we simply wouldn't be in the position to question our mores and
methods in the first place if we hadn't adopted a set of adaptations
that give us a massive advantage in the fitness landscape.
This is a rehash of the anthropomorphic principle. We are only capable
of criticising our actions because those very actions have placed us
in a lofty position of objectivity.
I don't understand why people can't see this. We are a hugely
successful species because of our ability to destroy on a massive
scale, not despite it.

>    The aspects of this culture that are harming the Nature
>that we are dependent on must be replaced...

Replace them and we diminish. We cease to be what makes us 'us'. This
would lead to our decline and stagnation just as surely as the route
we are now following.


>> It's too late, the trains already left the station. We're fucked,
>
>
>    No.
>
>
>the
>> planet isn't. It'll get along just fine without us, we are not as
>> important as you believe.
>
>
>    We are as important as any other aspect of existence.


Yes! But we have placed ourselves in the 'We are the only ones that
can make a difference' bracket. I believe this is arrogance. I do not
accept for one moment that we can turn back the tide, we are simply
riding the wave, and that is *exactly* as it should be, this is the
crux of the evolutionary process. We are not the bad guys or the good
guys, we are simply the latest guys.


> Conservationists complain of our selfish
>> homocentricity, but it is they who are obsessed with humanity's
>> importance. We arrived, we'll poison ourselves and much else, and then
>> we'll leave, the planet doesn't give a fuck, get over it.
>>
>
>        I reject your philosophy.  And there will be plenty
>of humans around, although the numbers will be small
>indeed compared to what they are now, *if* we don't
>profoundly change our ways.
>        You are obviously a very intelligent person. With
>a dose of hope and optimism you could be part of the
>solution....

My presumed intelligence or otherwise is irrelevant, this is simply a
case of examining the facts. We need to step back, and I don't mean to
a pan-human position, I mean right back, to a non-human position.
We cannot seem to 'get over ourselves', it is part of our make-up, it
is in our nature. As conscious, decision making, future formulating
beings, we see all issues in our own light, it is our great weakness,
it is why we still have religion, war, greed and envy. It is also our
greatest strength, giving us art, beauty, love and altruism.
I accept your rejection of my thoughts Bruce, debate is a joy which we
alone as a species enjoy.

>        To give up on the human race is to give up on your-
>self.......Not a good idea and certainly not necessary.

Here you presume too much. I have not given up on the human race, and
I deny absolutely that I lack optimism and hope. I love life, but I
try to accept that my place in this world is transient and
inconsequential. This does not fill me with some kind of Camusian
gloom, it free's me to see the world as it is.

Thank you for your time.

brad

"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:00nqdugl86sm34v6bgbrfm4n06jr3vglm8@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 23:27:43 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> >> >       We have to stop trashing the Planet. Whatever it takes to
> >accomplish
> >> >this end is what it takes.
> >>
> >> Very tautological. But here's a serious question. 'Why' do we have to
> >> stop trashing the planet? To what end?
> >
> >
> >    Because we are a part of Nature, and what we do to
> >Nature we do to ourselves.
>
> Of course, but that applies to all species to a lesser degree, we live
> in a closed system, so all actions of every member of that system will
> impact on other members in some way, no argument there.
>
>
> > What kind of human culture do
> >> you foresee existing on this future 'untrashed' planet?
> >
> >    Decentralized synthesis of  'primitive'  'medieval'  and
> >'modern' technologies....
>
> Well, this statement requires a week to answer!
> But come on Bruce, in order for your revised cultural and sociological
> system to operate, it would require a large portion of the planets
> inhabitants to act in a completely alien way. Mankind would have to
> deny all the traits which makes us what we are.

    You are confusing beliefs about what human beings
are, and what we actually are.
    If individuals can utterly transform their lives (which
happens all the time) then *groups* of individuals can.

> This is like saying 'Well, we could make it work, but we can't start
> from here'
>

        No. You always start from "here."  It's just time
to take another path at the crossroads that are always
at hand, one that goes through a terrain so different that
totally different tools are required. (to strain some metaphors)



>
> > How do you
> >> propose to stop, and then reverse, the entire natural tendencies of
> >> our 'shit in our own bed' race?
> >>

    By changing my/our beliefs about the nature and potential of human
beings. This society is only one of
numerous organizations available to us.
    Look at the Mayans- They had a very sophisticated
society and just walked away from it because it wasn't
working......We must do the same.


> >
> >    By doing it, the same way one does anything.  If the
> >old ways aren't working, adopt new ones that look
> >likely to succeed.....
>
> But here you make the classic category mistake!
> The old ways are working!

    I utterly disagree. You are saying, I think, that this is
a good system being mismanaged. Not so. It is rotten
from its very foundations.  Take away trashing the planet
and you would have an utterly different society. Trash-
ing the planet is what Industrial-Capitalism  DOES....

 By that I don't mean that everything we do
> is correct, I wouldn't insult your intelligence, but I maintain that
> we simply wouldn't be in the position to question our mores and
> methods in the first place if we hadn't adopted a set of adaptations
> that give us a massive advantage in the fitness landscape.

            Bullshit. What massive advantage?


> This is a rehash of the anthropomorphic principle. We are only capable
> of criticising our actions because those very actions have placed us
> in a lofty position of objectivity.
> I don't understand why people can't see this. We are a hugely
> successful species because of our ability to destroy on a massive
> scale, not despite it.
>

        I don't call that success. Define "success" please..

> >    The aspects of this culture that are harming the Nature
> >that we are dependent on must be replaced...
>
> Replace them and we diminish. We cease to be what makes us 'us'. This
> would lead to our decline and stagnation just as surely as the route
> we are now following.
>
>
           Wrong.

> >> It's too late, the trains already left the station. We're fucked,
> >
> >
> >    No.
> >
> >
> >the
> >> planet isn't. It'll get along just fine without us, we are not as
> >> important as you believe.
> >
> >
> >    We are as important as any other aspect of existence.
>
>
> Yes! But we have placed ourselves in the 'We are the only ones that
> can make a difference' bracket.


    I would say- 'in the only species that has any rights
bracket.'

 >I believe this is arrogance.


    pathological arrogance....

> I do not
> accept for one moment that we can turn back the tide, we are simply
> riding the wave, and that is *exactly* as it should be, this is the
> crux of the evolutionary process. We are not the bad guys or the good
> guys, we are simply the latest guys.
>

        In practical terms, we are the bad guys. Because of
our destructiveness, we have no friends among the other
species. This is sad...


>
> > Conservationists complain of our selfish
> >> homocentricity, but it is they who are obsessed with humanity's
> >> importance. We arrived, we'll poison ourselves and much else, and then
> >> we'll leave, the planet doesn't give a fuck, get over it.
> >>
> >
> >        I reject your philosophy.  And there will be plenty
> >of humans around, although the numbers will be small
> >indeed compared to what they are now, *if* we don't
> >profoundly change our ways.
> >        You are obviously a very intelligent person. With
> >a dose of hope and optimism you could be part of the
> >solution....
>
> My presumed intelligence or otherwise is irrelevant, this is simply a
> case of examining the facts.

    Some of your facts are facts. Some are erroneous
beliefs shared by many...


We need to step back, and I don't mean to
> a pan-human position, I mean right back, to a non-human position.
> We cannot seem to 'get over ourselves', it is part of our make-up, it
> is in our nature.

    A big part of the problem is that we think Nature is
based on bloody competition (wrong) and that it is hostile
to our existence. (wrong)


 As conscious, decision making, future formulating
> beings, we see all issues in our own light, it is our great weakness,
> it is why we still have religion, war, greed and envy. It is also our
> greatest strength, giving us art, beauty, love and altruism.
> I accept your rejection of my thoughts Bruce, debate is a joy which we
> alone as a species enjoy.
>

    How do you know that?  Sounds like more arrogance
to me......


> >        To give up on the human race is to give up on your-
> >self.......Not a good idea and certainly not necessary.
>
> Here you presume too much. I have not given up on the human race, and
> I deny absolutely that I lack optimism and hope. I love life, but I
> try to accept that my place in this world is transient and
> inconsequential.

        It is not.....

 This does not fill me with some kind of Camusian
> gloom, it free's me to see the world as it is.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>

    I am enjoying this...Sorry to be so slow in responding..


Bruce<+>


> brad
>

"Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>

        Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
hobby, which is as destructive as hell...

Bruce<+>


> "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > Check us out today...
> >
> > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> >
> > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for
global
> > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
> >
> >
>
>
>

In article <i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Bruce Burhans
says...
>
>
>"Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
>news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
>> REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
>
>        Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
>hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
>

Then why don't you practice what you preach, Bruce, and stop using your
computer?

- Andrew Langer

Any posts by Andrew Langer are his own, written by him, for his own
enjoyment (and the education of others).  Unless expressly stated,
they represent his own views, and not those of any other individuals
or entities.  He is not, nor has he ever been, paid to post here.

In article <gvRC8.115$xI6.88@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Bruce Burhans
says...
>
>
>"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:vgnndugeae3ognqk2ku2ci1365e49cmgke@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 10 May 2002 06:40:36 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
>> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Admiral" <kdick@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> >news:tiJC8.112109$o66.330562@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> >> All the more reason to go Digital.
>> >>
>> >
>> >   Hi-tech is even more destructive of the environment.
>> >It just isn't as easy to see, because the various production
>> >facilities are located in different areas.
>> >    The so-called "information age" has given rise to many new industries
>> >while it' proponents pretend that it is somehow saving the planet.
>> >
>> >Bruce<+>
>>
>> 'Hi-tech' being things like computers then Bruce, right?
>> And the 'information age' would include the internet I presume.
>>
>> And I expect you'd also like to shout down to all the planet killers
>> about how awful Elephant poaching is as well. That's if we can hear
>> you from atop your ivory fucking tower.
>>
>> brad
>>
>
>       We have to stop trashing the Planet. Whatever it takes to accomplish
>this end is what it takes.
>        Usually it's a matter of *how* things are done, rather than the
>things themselves.
>        Eating food from a garden outside your door has
>a *tiny* fraction of the environmental impact of the same
>foods purchased at Safeway, et al.
>        There's nothing wrong with the Internet, per se.
>

Except for the computer you're using, which presumably was made with plastics
and mined metals (or do you somehow interface with the net without the use of a
computer?).  And except for the electricity which powers you're computer, which
even if solar or wind powered, requires environmentally degrading raw materials
to generate (or do you think that solar panels or windmills simply spring into
existence)?

And then, of course, there are the computers which make up the net, and what
they were made out of, and what powers them.

No, there's nothing wrong with the internet, per se, unless you're the kind of
person who criticizes others for using digital cameras because "hi-tech is even
more destructive of the environment."

Try practicing what you preach, Bruce.  If hi-tech is destructive, then what the
heck are you doing here?

- Andrew Langer

Any posts by Andrew Langer are his own, written by him, for his own
enjoyment (and the education of others).  Unless expressly stated,
they represent his own views, and not those of any other individuals
or entities.  He is not, nor has he ever been, paid to post here.

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> >
>
>         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> hobby, which is as destructive as hell...

What a wanker response..... The only desruction our hobby does is record the
truth about what really happens on the land. By this , I mean there are a
lot of shonk landholders out there who don't want us to show what they are
really doing. THAT is destruction, what some of them are doing...... Care to
respond???
SR-C


>
> Bruce<+>
>
>
> > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > Check us out today...
> > >
> > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > >
> > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for
> global
> > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

My hobby?  What hobby??  Photography is my living.

For a hobby I manage a bauxite smelter...

Bruce, I think it is time to get back on the Rainbow Warrior and f*ck off

:-)

Cameron

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> >
>
>         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
>
> Bruce<+>
>
>
> > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > Check us out today...
> > >
> > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > >
> > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for
> global
> > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

    Ha! That fatuous bozo Andrew Langer thinks I'm going
to read more of his postings.
    Thereby establishing the truth of my assertions as to the
size of his ego.

Bruce<+>

"Scott R-C" <radfordsREMOVETHIS@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:3cdd9160_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
>
> "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> > hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
>
> What a wanker response..... The only desruction our hobby does is record
the
> truth about what really happens on the land. By this , I mean there are a
> lot of shonk landholders out there who don't want us to show what they are
> really doing. THAT is destruction, what some of them are doing...... Care
to
> respond???
> SR-C
>

        Just to repeat what I said earlier-  the demand for
silver by 10's of millions of photographers has a severe
environmental impact.
        We're taking about 1/2 of the silver mined in the world. (That's
mining, smelting, refining, etc...)
         You'll have to subtract that from your calculations
above, if you feel like being honest about your endeavors.
        Then there's the chemcals involved, another debit
on your score card. Things are never as simple as most
'environmentalists' make them out to be.
        While they are celebrating the salvation of a forest
somewhere, the same company is already busy taking
another one down, because the _demand_ for wood
products has not diminished.

Bruce<+>


>
> >
> > Bruce<+>
> >
> >
> > > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> > > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > > Check us out today...
> > > >
> > > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > > >
> > > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for
> > global
> > > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

"Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
news:LhgD8.8300$b5.28576@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> My hobby?  What hobby??  Photography is my living.
>
> For a hobby I manage a bauxite smelter...
>
> Bruce, I think it is time to get back on the Rainbow Warrior and f*ck off
>
>
            Cameron, the fact that you make a living at
photography  sure does explain why you want to shut
anyone up that criticises it.
            Can you say "corruption." ?

Bruce<+>



:-)
>
> Cameron
>
> "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> > hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
> >
> > Bruce<+>
> >
> >
> > > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> > > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > > Check us out today...
> > > >
> > > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > > >
> > > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight for
> > global
> > > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature photography!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

I don't want to shut you up, I just want you to look at the groups you are
posting to and realise that aus.photo is the odd one out.  Therefore, stop
cross posting to everyone, especially aus.photo.  I for one, think you are
full of shit with this photography is damaging the environment crap.

Cameron

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5IgD8.3937$Nt3.257732@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> news:LhgD8.8300$b5.28576@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > My hobby?  What hobby??  Photography is my living.
> >
> > For a hobby I manage a bauxite smelter...
> >
> > Bruce, I think it is time to get back on the Rainbow Warrior and f*ck
off
> >
> >
>             Cameron, the fact that you make a living at
> photography  sure does explain why you want to shut
> anyone up that criticises it.
>             Can you say "corruption." ?
>
> Bruce<+>
>
>
>
> :-)
> >
> > Cameron
> >
> > "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > >
> > > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > > news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER
REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> > > hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
> > >
> > > Bruce<+>
> > >
> > >
> > > > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> > > > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > > > Check us out today...
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight
for
> > > global
> > > > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature
photography!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

"Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
news:thhD8.8315$b5.28254@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> I don't want to shut you up, I just want you to look at the groups you are
> posting to and realise that aus.photo is the odd one out.  Therefore, stop
> cross posting to everyone, especially aus.photo.

    I will post anywhere I feel like and there's nothing you
can do about it, fool...


  I for one, think you are
> full of shit with this photography is damaging the environment crap.
>

    So where does the silver used in photographic film
come from?
    Santa Claus? The Tooth Fairy?
    And those wonderful developing chemicals. Could it
be possible that they come from giant petrochemical
processing plants?


Bruce<+>








> Cameron
>
> "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:5IgD8.3937$Nt3.257732@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > news:LhgD8.8300$b5.28576@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > My hobby?  What hobby??  Photography is my living.
> > >
> > > For a hobby I manage a bauxite smelter...
> > >
> > > Bruce, I think it is time to get back on the Rainbow Warrior and f*ck
> off
> > >
> > >
> >             Cameron, the fact that you make a living at
> > photography  sure does explain why you want to shut
> > anyone up that criticises it.
> >             Can you say "corruption." ?
> >
> > Bruce<+>
> >
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > >
> > > Cameron
> > >
> > > "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > > >
> > > > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > > > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER
> REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> > > > hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
> > > >
> > > > Bruce<+>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in message
> > > > > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > > > > Check us out today...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the fight
> for
> > > > global
> > > > > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature
> photography!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

What type of car do you drive??

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dKhD8.4295$Nt3.324605@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> news:thhD8.8315$b5.28254@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > I don't want to shut you up, I just want you to look at the groups you
are
> > posting to and realise that aus.photo is the odd one out.  Therefore,
stop
> > cross posting to everyone, especially aus.photo.
>
>     I will post anywhere I feel like and there's nothing you
> can do about it, fool...
>
>
>   I for one, think you are
> > full of shit with this photography is damaging the environment crap.
> >
>
>     So where does the silver used in photographic film
> come from?
>     Santa Claus? The Tooth Fairy?
>     And those wonderful developing chemicals. Could it
> be possible that they come from giant petrochemical
> processing plants?
>
>
> Bruce<+>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Cameron
> >
> > "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:5IgD8.3937$Nt3.257732@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > >
> > > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > > news:LhgD8.8300$b5.28576@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > > My hobby?  What hobby??  Photography is my living.
> > > >
> > > > For a hobby I manage a bauxite smelter...
> > > >
> > > > Bruce, I think it is time to get back on the Rainbow Warrior and
f*ck
> > off
> > > >
> > > >
> > >             Cameron, the fact that you make a living at
> > > photography  sure does explain why you want to shut
> > > anyone up that criticises it.
> > >             Can you say "corruption." ?
> > >
> > > Bruce<+>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > :-)
> > > >
> > > > Cameron
> > > >
> > > > "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:i7eD8.454$X%5.174@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:vK3D8.7926$b5.27527@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > > > > REMOVE AUS.PHOTO PLEASE FROM ANY FURTHER
> > REPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >         Why? Can't handle a little reality intruding into your
> > > > > hobby, which is as destructive as hell...
> > > > >
> > > > > Bruce<+>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > "GOPS" <webmaster@nospam.outdoorphotography.org> wrote in
message
> > > > > > news:nHIC8.1200$wG1.1151@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> > > > > > > Check us out today...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.outdoorphotography.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We hope you will join the organization and help us in the
fight
> > for
> > > > > global
> > > > > > > conservation though your passion of outdoor and nature
> > photography!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

"Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
news:3qiD8.8358$b5.28808@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> What type of car do you drive??


    None. But if I had a fleet of them, it would in no way
change the environmental realities of photography.

[snip]

Bruce<+>

I give up. I thought you had a hint of common sense but I was sorely
mistaken.

Why don't you wander off to aus.nuclear.and.coal.fired.power.is.great and
hassle them

Cameron

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:snjD8.910$X%5.677@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> news:3qiD8.8358$b5.28808@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > What type of car do you drive??
>
>
>     None. But if I had a fleet of them, it would in no way
> change the environmental realities of photography.
>
> [snip]
>
> Bruce<+>
>
>

"Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
news:bujD8.8406$b5.28783@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> I give up. I thought you had a hint of common sense but I was sorely
> mistaken.
>
> Why don't you wander off to aus.nuclear.and.coal.fired.power.is.great and
> hassle them
>
> Cameron
>
> "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:snjD8.910$X%5.677@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Cameron" <camNOeron@camSPAMlairdPLEASEphoto.com> wrote in message
> > news:3qiD8.8358$b5.28808@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > > What type of car do you drive??
> >
> >
> >     None. But if I had a fleet of them, it would in no way
> > change the environmental realities of photography.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Bruce<+>
> >
> >
>
>
>
        And thusly Cameron makes the classical bigot's
retreat.
        Grow up.

Bruce<+>

:         Just to repeat what I said earlier-  the demand for
: silver by 10's of millions of photographers has a severe
: environmental impact.
:         We're taking about 1/2 of the silver mined in the world. (That's
: mining, smelting, refining, etc...)
:          You'll have to subtract that from your calculations
: above, if you feel like being honest about your endeavors.
:         Then there's the chemcals involved, another debit
: on your score card. Things are never as simple as most
: 'environmentalists' make them out to be.
:         While they are celebrating the salvation of a forest
: somewhere, the same company is already busy taking
: another one down, because the _demand_ for wood
: products has not diminished.
:
dear mr ill informed bruce,
one of the hottest topics here on aus.photo is how to handle the various
difficulties of digital cameras.
they are in the long term more environmentally freindly than the old silver
sort in that, once produced, the camera and memory device require no more
processing apart from  being input into a computer.
very environmentally freindly and an improvement.

"andrew G" <dalinean@starday.com.au> wrote in message
news:abkpit$ifsjd$1@ID-119557.news.dfncis.de...
> :         Just to repeat what I said earlier-  the demand for
> : silver by 10's of millions of photographers has a severe
> : environmental impact.
> :         We're taking about 1/2 of the silver mined in the world. (That's
> : mining, smelting, refining, etc...)
> :          You'll have to subtract that from your calculations
> : above, if you feel like being honest about your endeavors.
> :         Then there's the chemcals involved, another debit
> : on your score card. Things are never as simple as most
> : 'environmentalists' make them out to be.
> :         While they are celebrating the salvation of a forest
> : somewhere, the same company is already busy taking
> : another one down, because the _demand_ for wood
> : products has not diminished.
> :
> dear mr ill informed bruce,
> one of the hottest topics here on aus.photo is how to handle the various
> difficulties of digital cameras.
> they are in the long term more environmentally freindly than the old
silver
> sort in that, once produced, the camera and memory device require no more
> processing apart from  being input into a computer.
> very environmentally freindly and an improvement.
>
>
>
        Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
        Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
proceed from there....
        Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
        Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to create
anything digital? What?!  You don't
know *that* either?
        Perhaps you should do a little research before you
open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
misinforming  your fellow human beings....

Bruce<+>


Bruce<+>

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> writes:

>         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
> perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.

Sand. heat. phopherous, arsenic, silane, bunches of other extremely
nasty things and lots of water.

>         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
> proceed from there....
>         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.

I very much doubt you do either.

>         Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to create
> anything digital? What?!  You don't
> know *that* either?

Again, I doubt you do either, you whining cretin.

>         Perhaps you should do a little research before you
> open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
> misinforming  your fellow human beings....

At least he /has/ fellow human beings. You seems to be some pseudo-
environmental idiot with delusions of grandeur. Would you care to
speculate where the majority of silver in photo processing ends up? 

C41 and E6 films, the most commonly used film types today, both retain
absolutely no silver in their final processed state, instead all the
silver is processed out into the chemistry which is then recyled
specifically so its dissolved silver can be extracted. Did you know
that? Today's colour papers are similar.

Crawl back into your little hole, troll.

B>

:         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
: perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
:         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
: proceed from there....
:         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
:         Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to create
: anything digital? What?!  You don't
: know *that* either?
:         Perhaps you should do a little research before you
: open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
: misinforming  your fellow human beings....
:
isnt technology wonderful.
the computer you are using to type these messages uses far, far more
materials and processes than the chips inside any camera.

digital photography relies on memory chips. these are highly reusable and
have a service life with about 100,000 insertions (not photos) being the
industry minimum.
my 64 mb chip (it's small compared to some) will hold up to 1000 photos
depending upon the degree of quality that i want.
usually i use about 600k per photo taking just over 70 per use.
this amount of photos, if taken using convertional technology would require
the use of many many rolls of film, each one using up valuable rescources.
digital photoraphy is very environmentally freindly.

"Bruce Murphy" <pack-news@rattus.net> wrote in message
news:m27km9vfn0.fsf@fuscipes.rattus.net...
> "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> writes:
>
> >         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
> > perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
>
> Sand. heat. phopherous, arsenic, silane, bunches of other extremely
> nasty things and lots of water.
>
> >         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
> > proceed from there....
> >         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
>
> I very much doubt you do either.
>

    Get lost, bozo.

Bruce<+>

"andrew G" <dalinean@starday.com.au> wrote in message
news:ablrp6$j5f9j$1@ID-119557.news.dfncis.de...
>
> :         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
> : perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
> :         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
> : proceed from there....
> :         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
> :         Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to create
> : anything digital? What?!  You don't
> : know *that* either?
> :         Perhaps you should do a little research before you
> : open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
> : misinforming  your fellow human beings....
> :
> isnt technology wonderful.
> the computer you are using to type these messages uses far, far more
> materials and processes than the chips inside any camera.
>
> digital photography relies on memory chips. these are highly reusable and
> have a service life with about 100,000 insertions (not photos) being the
> industry minimum.
> my 64 mb chip (it's small compared to some) will hold up to 1000 photos
> depending upon the degree of quality that i want.
> usually i use about 600k per photo taking just over 70 per use.
> this amount of photos, if taken using convertional technology would
require
> the use of many many rolls of film, each one using up valuable rescources.
> digital photoraphy is very environmentally freindly.
>
>
>

        Except for a little detail you've failed to mention-
Without a computer, your digital camera is useless.
        Once you figure this into the equation, digital photography is just
as destructive as the other way.
        Then theres the printer and its chemicals....
        And the elctricity...

        Please don't get me wrong,  photography is no more
destructive than a thousand other hobbies out there, and
considerably less so than, say, cars.
        But the sum total environmental impact of 10s of
millions of you is considerable. Add a thousand other
destructive hobbies to the total,  plus the things of everyday life like
cars and TVs and you have a recipe for
disaster.
        Drawing/painting is a wonderful art. And causes a
tiny fraction of the environmental impact.  It also develops
a variety of skills that make one a better person.
        No offense (and I'm not saying that there isn't an art-
istic aspect to photography),  but any moron can point and  click, right?
        We are pillaging the Nature that we are dependent on. And you can't
do that without suffering terrible consequences.
        What I am getting from most of you here, is that you
are like a fat person who just doesn't want to accept that
there's no way to be slim and fit if you are going to sit around all day
watching TV and stuffing your face.
        The human race must profoundly change its ways.
We can do it the hard way or the easy way....

        "Industry IS violence."

                                    -Ghandi

Bruce<+>

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> writes:

> 
>     Get lost, bozo.

Such a wonderfully reasoned response. I guess you never heard of the
silver recyling process then?

Ah well, into every USENET a few idiots must stray.

B>

my hp printer prints directly from the memory chip of my camera. computer
not required (obviously I have one though). the inks could be made
organically......

--
Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter:
http://www.webconx.com/subscribe.htm

Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/
Human powered devices, equipment, and transport -
http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/humanpower.htm
sspence@webconx.com
"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:rTwD8.1832$X%5.1676@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "andrew G" <dalinean@starday.com.au> wrote in message
> news:ablrp6$j5f9j$1@ID-119557.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > :         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
> > : perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
> > :         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
> > : proceed from there....
> > :         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
> > :         Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to
create
> > : anything digital? What?!  You don't
> > : know *that* either?
> > :         Perhaps you should do a little research before you
> > : open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
> > : misinforming  your fellow human beings....
> > :
> > isnt technology wonderful.
> > the computer you are using to type these messages uses far, far more
> > materials and processes than the chips inside any camera.
> >
> > digital photography relies on memory chips. these are highly reusable
and
> > have a service life with about 100,000 insertions (not photos) being the
> > industry minimum.
> > my 64 mb chip (it's small compared to some) will hold up to 1000 photos
> > depending upon the degree of quality that i want.
> > usually i use about 600k per photo taking just over 70 per use.
> > this amount of photos, if taken using convertional technology would
> require
> > the use of many many rolls of film, each one using up valuable
rescources.
> > digital photoraphy is very environmentally freindly.
> >
> >
> >
>
>         Except for a little detail you've failed to mention-
> Without a computer, your digital camera is useless.
>         Once you figure this into the equation, digital photography is
just
> as destructive as the other way.
>         Then theres the printer and its chemicals....
>         And the elctricity...
>
>         Please don't get me wrong,  photography is no more
> destructive than a thousand other hobbies out there, and
> considerably less so than, say, cars.
>         But the sum total environmental impact of 10s of
> millions of you is considerable. Add a thousand other
> destructive hobbies to the total,  plus the things of everyday life like
> cars and TVs and you have a recipe for
> disaster.
>         Drawing/painting is a wonderful art. And causes a
> tiny fraction of the environmental impact.  It also develops
> a variety of skills that make one a better person.
>         No offense (and I'm not saying that there isn't an art-
> istic aspect to photography),  but any moron can point and  click, right?
>         We are pillaging the Nature that we are dependent on. And you
can't
> do that without suffering terrible consequences.
>         What I am getting from most of you here, is that you
> are like a fat person who just doesn't want to accept that
> there's no way to be slim and fit if you are going to sit around all day
> watching TV and stuffing your face.
>         The human race must profoundly change its ways.
> We can do it the hard way or the easy way....
>
>         "Industry IS violence."
>
>                                     -Ghandi
>
> Bruce<+>
>
>
>
>
>
>

"Steve Spence" <sspence@webconx.com> wrote in message
news:d6xD8.46132$C8.16873528@news02.optonline.net...
> my hp printer prints directly from the memory chip of my camera. computer
> not required (obviously I have one though). the inks could be made
> organically......
>

    In a factory supplied by ships and trains and trucks
with raw materials from half-way around the world and
then shipped to you?
    That's real organic....

Bruce<+>





> --
> Steve Spence
> Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter:
> http://www.webconx.com/subscribe.htm
>
> Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/
> Human powered devices, equipment, and transport -
> http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/humanpower.htm
> sspence@webconx.com
> "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:rTwD8.1832$X%5.1676@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "andrew G" <dalinean@starday.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ablrp6$j5f9j$1@ID-119557.news.dfncis.de...
> > >
> > > :         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
> > > : perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
> > > :         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
> > > : proceed from there....
> > > :         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
> > > :         Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to
> create
> > > : anything digital? What?!  You don't
> > > : know *that* either?
> > > :         Perhaps you should do a little research before you
> > > : open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
> > > : misinforming  your fellow human beings....
> > > :
> > > isnt technology wonderful.
> > > the computer you are using to type these messages uses far, far more
> > > materials and processes than the chips inside any camera.
> > >
> > > digital photography relies on memory chips. these are highly reusable
> and
> > > have a service life with about 100,000 insertions (not photos) being
the
> > > industry minimum.
> > > my 64 mb chip (it's small compared to some) will hold up to 1000
photos
> > > depending upon the degree of quality that i want.
> > > usually i use about 600k per photo taking just over 70 per use.
> > > this amount of photos, if taken using convertional technology would
> > require
> > > the use of many many rolls of film, each one using up valuable
> rescources.
> > > digital photoraphy is very environmentally freindly.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >         Except for a little detail you've failed to mention-
> > Without a computer, your digital camera is useless.
> >         Once you figure this into the equation, digital photography is
> just
> > as destructive as the other way.
> >         Then theres the printer and its chemicals....
> >         And the elctricity...
> >
> >         Please don't get me wrong,  photography is no more
> > destructive than a thousand other hobbies out there, and
> > considerably less so than, say, cars.
> >         But the sum total environmental impact of 10s of
> > millions of you is considerable. Add a thousand other
> > destructive hobbies to the total,  plus the things of everyday life like
> > cars and TVs and you have a recipe for
> > disaster.
> >         Drawing/painting is a wonderful art. And causes a
> > tiny fraction of the environmental impact.  It also develops
> > a variety of skills that make one a better person.
> >         No offense (and I'm not saying that there isn't an art-
> > istic aspect to photography),  but any moron can point and  click,
right?
> >         We are pillaging the Nature that we are dependent on. And you
> can't
> > do that without suffering terrible consequences.
> >         What I am getting from most of you here, is that you
> > are like a fat person who just doesn't want to accept that
> > there's no way to be slim and fit if you are going to sit around all day
> > watching TV and stuffing your face.
> >         The human race must profoundly change its ways.
> > We can do it the hard way or the easy way....
> >
> >         "Industry IS violence."
> >
> >                                     -Ghandi
> >
> > Bruce<+>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

would you not agree that if they are going to ship those inks, it's better
to ship inks made from plants instead of petroleum?


--
Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter:
http://www.webconx.com/subscribe.htm

Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/
Human powered devices, equipment, and transport -
http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/humanpower.htm
sspence@webconx.com
"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uuyD8.2036$X%5.1860@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Steve Spence" <sspence@webconx.com> wrote in message
> news:d6xD8.46132$C8.16873528@news02.optonline.net...
> > my hp printer prints directly from the memory chip of my camera.
computer
> > not required (obviously I have one though). the inks could be made
> > organically......
> >
>
>     In a factory supplied by ships and trains and trucks
> with raw materials from half-way around the world and
> then shipped to you?
>     That's real organic....
>
> Bruce<+>
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > Steve Spence
> > Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter:
> > http://www.webconx.com/subscribe.htm
> >
> > Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/
> > Human powered devices, equipment, and transport -
> > http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/humanpower.htm
> > sspence@webconx.com
> > "Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:rTwD8.1832$X%5.1676@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > >
> > > "andrew G" <dalinean@starday.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:ablrp6$j5f9j$1@ID-119557.news.dfncis.de...
> > > >
> > > > :         Since you claim to be knowledgable on this subject,
> > > > : perhaps you'd like to describe how a chip is made.
> > > > :         Start with a list of all the raw materials (mines) and
> > > > : proceed from there....
> > > > :         Oh! You don't *know* ?  Big surprise.
> > > > :         Perhaps a list of the *numerous* industries necessary to
> > create
> > > > : anything digital? What?!  You don't
> > > > : know *that* either?
> > > > :         Perhaps you should do a little research before you
> > > > : open your mouth. That way you wouldn't be guilty of
> > > > : misinforming  your fellow human beings....
> > > > :
> > > > isnt technology wonderful.
> > > > the computer you are using to type these messages uses far, far more
> > > > materials and processes than the chips inside any camera.
> > > >
> > > > digital photography relies on memory chips. these are highly
reusable
> > and
> > > > have a service life with about 100,000 insertions (not photos) being
> the
> > > > industry minimum.
> > > > my 64 mb chip (it's small compared to some) will hold up to 1000
> photos
> > > > depending upon the degree of quality that i want.
> > > > usually i use about 600k per photo taking just over 70 per use.
> > > > this amount of photos, if taken using convertional technology would
> > > require
> > > > the use of many many rolls of film, each one using up valuable
> > rescources.
> > > > digital photoraphy is very environmentally freindly.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >         Except for a little detail you've failed to mention-
> > > Without a computer, your digital camera is useless.
> > >         Once you figure this into the equation, digital photography is
> > just
> > > as destructive as the other way.
> > >         Then theres the printer and its chemicals....
> > >         And the elctricity...
> > >
> > >         Please don't get me wrong,  photography is no more
> > > destructive than a thousand other hobbies out there, and
> > > considerably less so than, say, cars.
> > >         But the sum total environmental impact of 10s of
> > > millions of you is considerable. Add a thousand other
> > > destructive hobbies to the total,  plus the things of everyday life
like
> > > cars and TVs and you have a recipe for
> > > disaster.
> > >         Drawing/painting is a wonderful art. And causes a
> > > tiny fraction of the environmental impact.  It also develops
> > > a variety of skills that make one a better person.
> > >         No offense (and I'm not saying that there isn't an art-
> > > istic aspect to photography),  but any moron can point and  click,
> right?
> > >         We are pillaging the Nature that we are dependent on. And you
> > can't
> > > do that without suffering terrible consequences.
> > >         What I am getting from most of you here, is that you
> > > are like a fat person who just doesn't want to accept that
> > > there's no way to be slim and fit if you are going to sit around all
day
> > > watching TV and stuffing your face.
> > >         The human race must profoundly change its ways.
> > > We can do it the hard way or the easy way....
> > >
> > >         "Industry IS violence."
> > >
> > >                                     -Ghandi
> > >
> > > Bruce<+>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

"Steve Spence" <sspence@webconx.com> wrote in message
news:fmzD8.47604$C8.17262782@news02.optonline.net...
> would you not agree that if they are going to ship those inks, it's better
> to ship inks made from plants instead of petroleum?
>

    Sure. But the negative environmental impact of the
other aspects of the industry so far outweigh that one,
that it makes almost no difference.
    We are in a serious bind. The environmental movement
is, in practical terms, an utter failure.
    The activities that are seriously harming the natural systems we are
dependent on  are the things that people
take for granted as a fact of life, which they most certainly
are not.
    There is no one person or group or cabal or conspiracy to put the blame
on. *All* environmental damage is 'non-point-source.'  What corporation
could
exist for a millisecond if we didn't buy their products?

Bruce<+>





>
> --
> Steve Spence

In article <9ygD8.3893$Nt3.313499@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Bruce
Burhans says...
>
>    Ha! That fatuous bozo Andrew Langer thinks I'm going
>to read more of his postings.
>    Thereby establishing the truth of my assertions as to the
>size of his ego.

Hey, Bruce, who is more of the fatuous bozo:  he who makes a valid attempt to
try to engage someone who is apparently misinformed as to much of that which he
espouses, or he who dismisses that person making the attempt as a "fatuous
bozo", and refuses to read what that person is writing?

- Andrew Langer

Any posts by Andrew Langer are his own, written by him, for his own
enjoyment (and the education of others).  Unless expressly stated,
they represent his own views, and not those of any other individuals
or entities.  He is not, nor has he ever been, paid to post here.

"Mike S. Medintz" <medintz@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<abl54u$b2n$1@slb3.atl.mindspring.net>...

> Channellocks aren't wrenches. They're pliers, except they don't have any 
> springs involved so you need to have some sort of grip strength to use 
> them.

Seems kinda inconvenient to me.

OTOH, I'm sure your wrist muscles are well-developed.


Scott

Just out of interest, is anybody getting mail bombed?

brad

"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1upvduc2kotqrtoobp8h9ko8ggpqd4c8rc@4ax.com...
>
> Just out of interest, is anybody getting mail bombed?
>
> brad

    Not us.

Bruce<+>

On Mon, 13 May 2002 18:14:25 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
<bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:1upvduc2kotqrtoobp8h9ko8ggpqd4c8rc@4ax.com...
>>
>> Just out of interest, is anybody getting mail bombed?
>>
>> brad
>
>    Not us.
>
>Bruce<+>
>
>
>

I wasn't asking you retard, I'm too scared.

brad

"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5l60euglhuusb0ivi67hegmukt1fggagq1@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 May 2002 18:14:25 GMT, "Bruce Burhans"
> <bburhan1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:1upvduc2kotqrtoobp8h9ko8ggpqd4c8rc@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> Just out of interest, is anybody getting mail bombed?
> >>
> >> brad
> >
> >    Not us.
> >
> >Bruce<+>
> >
> >
> >
>
> I wasn't asking you retard, I'm too scared.
>

       Why call me something I'm obviously not? Do you
enjoy looking stupid?


Bruce<+>




> brad
>

you mean more than usual?

--
Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter:
http://www.webconx.com/subscribe.htm

Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/
Human powered devices, equipment, and transport -
http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/humanpower.htm
sspence@webconx.com
"Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1upvduc2kotqrtoobp8h9ko8ggpqd4c8rc@4ax.com...
>
> Just out of interest, is anybody getting mail bombed?
>
> brad

"Steve Spence" <sspence@webconx.com> wrote in message
news:XrZD8.7541$ja.1702248@news02.optonline.net...
> you mean more than usual?
>
> --
> Steve Spence
> Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter:
> http://www.webconx.com/subscribe.htm
>
> Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/
> Human powered devices, equipment, and transport -
> http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/humanpower.htm
> sspence@webconx.com
> "Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1upvduc2kotqrtoobp8h9ko8ggpqd4c8rc@4ax.com...
> >
> > Just out of interest, is anybody getting mail bombed?
> >
> > brad
>
>
>

        This from a guy who's pushing those renewable
energy fantasies?
        There are *no* renewable energy sources for the
number of people using the amount of energy that they
do. (include the energy needed for the mining and production and
transportation of all their stuff, too)
        The world doesn't need any more fools telling them
that they can go on living basically just like they are *and*
keep the planet healthy.
        For example- there will never be an earth-friendly
car. It's impossible.....
        Now, having no other choice, this well-intentioned bigot will call
me an idiot and curse and wail and go back to re-arranging the deckchairs on
the Titanic....

Bruce<+>

"Bruce Burhans" <bburhan1@earthlink.net> writes:

> "Brad Martin" <brad@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:5l60euglhuusb0ivi67hegmukt1fggagq1@4ax.com...
> >
> > I wasn't asking you retard, I'm too scared.
> >
> 
>        Why call me something I'm obviously not? Do you
> enjoy looking stupid?

He didn't.

B>

    Listen, Bruce Murphy.  The Usenet has more than its
share of people running around calling other people idiots,
or something similar.
    They are a bunch of pathetic losers that contribute
nothing but bad feelings.
    I have learned to give a person 1 chance. If they can
only spew abuse and have nothing intelligent to say, I
thereafter simply refrain from downloading their messages.
    You had your chance.
    Now piss off.
    Done.

Bruce<+>