plchacker

Members
  • Content Count

    5,279
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About plchacker

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist
  • Birthday 09/01/1963

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Mobile, AL
  • Interests
    Helping the environment, limiting the government.
    Having fun.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,913 profile views
  1. plchacker

    A Call to Arms! Stop the Shit flinging!

    Agreed. I spent quite a few summers of my youth on the Canadian side of Lake Erie. That was it he 70s. Still have fond memories.
  2. plchacker

    India and Pakistan going at it

    Anyone else notice the recent decline of robocalls? Guess they are a little preoccupied.
  3. plchacker

    A Call to Arms! Stop the Shit flinging!

    I’m guessing trans. It is a shallow bitch
  4. plchacker

    Democracy in Jeopardy

    Yep. It is amazing what the paper industry has done for us. I always Cary a stash of TP in a ziplock bag when I’m the woods. Other things too but I never forget the paper.
  5. plchacker

    Democracy in Jeopardy

    AOC’s plan would completely tear down our economy and replace it with socialism. Oh yeah I forgot to menti N no more cows. What makes pure government control better than a system that has launched the success we have today? I would much rather take on Carrier than the US. Do you really think there is no corruption in government? Truth is with our current system an individual is much more likely to be successful than In AOC’s world.
  6. plchacker

    Democracy in Jeopardy

    So as long as the government has total control you are happy? Am I reading that correctly? If so, they You are truly nuts. This is not a govt vs oil/gas situation. That is the way you, or at least AOC, wish it was, then you have an easy target and you empower government totalitarianism which is the true objective of the GND. Do you have any idea how new industry is developed? Infrastructure is one thing, but actual new industry is very different. As far as "failed economic theories," last time I checked socialism has yet to prove viability in all the many attempts at implementation. Even China had to turn to capitalism to get results. Over the past two years I have spent time on two totally different projects which are beneficial to the environment. One implements steam sterilization of soil on a much larger scale than is currently available now. That eliminates the need for weed killers. The other was looked at and tested by Southern Company using some really tricked out labs. It has the ability to take a home's HVAC off of the grid. We are working with its limitations now attempting to find ways to make it effective on a more wide spread basis. This particular project has been in development for three years now. We hope to start production this year. One man had an idea, he bought thousands of dollars of equipment to test that idea, he is investing in people to develop that idea. It is a great idea. That sir, is how a new industry is born. But you would say that the government should reap the rewards of his investment, his genius, and his tenacity to make his idea a reality. While you preach from the podium about the evils of capitalism destroying the environment. I am working with capitalism to actually help the environment. There is a difference between blow-hards and those who get things done. If you are serious about the environment, there is one thing you can do, wipe your ass with a pine cone instead of paper.
  7. plchacker

    Climate news

    Stalin, Mao et al would agree...
  8. plchacker

    Climate news

    Yep, you know without doubt exactly what I think. What my thought process is and what evidence I trust. Yes sir you are a freaking psychic. Bless your heart.
  9. plchacker

    Climate news

    Thanks for the science. I truly wish I had more time to ask more questions. Today was a break for me. I'm back at it tomorrow. I do love the fact that the projects I am working on could prove to be very helpful for the environment. I remember questioning man's influence on the climate when I was just a kid. At that time most people I knew heated with wood. I wondered even then what effect that had on our environment. (before the warnings of the coming ice age) Hell, I got in trouble for voicing that opinion in my 5th grade history class. In those days, students did not question teachers. Have a good day to all, it'll be a while before I make it back.
  10. plchacker

    Climate news

    Prove me wrong.
  11. plchacker

    Climate news

    I agree about pick ups. I have only owned one personally. I have always had access to one. Hauling horse trailers, hay, feed, building materials and the like are a pain without one. Most pick up drivers really don't care about fuel prices. For many it is a status symbol. Not unlike driving a Prius or Volt in other circles. I quit driving big cars decades ago. I take a lot of grief for the cars I do own, but I'm getting 32 MPG in a car that handles well. When I do need to haul something - even my boat - I often have to borrow a truck these days. I don't do the farm thing anymore. My daughter is old enough to take care of the horses on her own. I am completely for conservation. My only caveat is not destroying our economy in the process. I don't deny that humans have influenced our climate. I do question how much. I certainly have grown weary after a lifetime of catastrophic predictions that always seem to be twenty years down the road.
  12. plchacker

    Climate news

    But ExxonMobil disagrees that any of its early statements were so stark, let alone conclusive at all. “We didn’t reach those conclusions, nor did we try to bury it like they suggest,” ExxonMobil spokesperson Allan Jeffers tells Scientific American. “The thing that shocks me the most is that we’ve been saying this for years, that we have been involved in climate research. These guys go down and pull some documents that we made available publicly in the archives and portray them as some kind of bombshell whistle-blower exposé because of the loaded language and the selective use of materials.” From the same article. That said, the article also quotes questionable resources like Greenpeace. Again, rant as you choose. I am not washed in the blood of impending climate disaster. Things I do believe: We should be responsible with our natural resourses We should reduce polution, in all its forms, as much as is feasible without destroying our economy 95% or better of Climate Science chatter is based on political beliefs. Very little of it is backed up through solid science Solid climate science is out there. But scientists for the most part, are not good at public communications beyond published work, which is difficult for the average person to understand There is plenty money on both sides of the debate. and both sides get what they pay for Politics ruins science There are very few laws in physics. It is highly doubtful that anyone anytime soon will be capable of listing laws of climate science. Until then, the only proper thing to do is to remain a skeptic. Being a skeptic does not mean that you refuse to believe the data, it simply means that you continue the execution of science Finally no amount of name calling and ranting on your behalf will change my mind. I certainly do not expect to change yours. Hell, I don't even know you.
  13. plchacker

    Climate news

    The process currently used in greenhouses and other smaller applications is simply injecting steam into the soil. There are a variety of ways to do this. Some use hoppers, another uses lances still another uses a simple tarp. The primary thing is that all of these work on a much smaller scale. My first thought was that this is a very expensive undertaking, even in the best situation. That said, there is really positive results. I was told that steam is required. Hot air alone will not work. My thought there is the ability of steam to conduct heat more effectively than air. Moisture may come into play too. Things I don't know: How much the chemical actually cost How much it costs to implement the chemical What the actual dangers/environmental costs of the chemical are They must be bad, because Europe and parts of California have already outlawed its use All of those factors come into play. My job though is not to prove validity. It is simply to design the controls and limited parts of the machine. But I can't help but wonder what the overall picture is. The HVAC system is really cool too. That is yet another NDA. We are taking a week off from that project and will continue likely next week. Everybody needed a break. Testing so far has been favorable. The design tests were nerve racking. The facility we are working in is pretty amazing. The test unit chamber can control temp from -31F to 185F and 10-95% relative humidity. it is about the size of a walk-in freezer. I am now convinced that leaving the college was a good thing. That was a tough decision. My program had over 100 students when I left. I started with 10 students fourteen years ago.
  14. plchacker

    Climate news

    Your rant will be accessed by its merit, or lack there of.