foolsbreath

Thanks again! VVVVVVVVgets another small pach cutVVVVVVVV

Thanks Spud VVVVVgets small pach cuttingVVVVV

Its not quite that simple. It could certainly be classified as carbon neutral as long as the area was replanted with a species that will capture the same amount of CO2 per unit area. Any firewood is considered carbon neatral as long as the forest it came from is replanted Renewable is a vague term that is not really applied to old growth forests as the time taken to attain that carbon is extremely long when compared with a plantation with the purpose of capturing carbon One could for instance say that coal and oil are indeed renewable if you are prepared to wait long enough. I think for a energy source to be renewable the process has to be able to repeated on a regular basis with a net return that makes the option viable in relation to the expenditure outlayed via inputs. If man could produce large oil or coal fields, that time frame could be hundreds of years, but for trees I think the cycle would have to be 4 to 5 growing cycles per human lifespan I however believe tha whole science involved with forest sinks is dubious at best as accumulation of carbon and the turnover of biomass (eg leaf fall and degredation which generates GHG's) is different for every climate and even every growing season, and bound to change with a changing climate. Furthermore, the carbon only remains captured for the lifetime of the wood product it goes into which could be a very short lifespan up to maybe a couple of hundred years at best, which means that at best you are only delaying that carbon being released into natural systems and ultimately the atmosphere by only a handful of generations of men. Now a cool tree friendly idea I got at xmas was a recycled paper card with a seed built into it. After the festivities are over you plant and water your card to grow a nice native plant! I was pretty stoked with that!

damn............ sad news indeed

yeah, the problem as I see it is the one strike and your out mentality of the zero tolerance regime set up by the last government. If people where faced with a justice system that allowed for people to make mistakes and learn from them ie positive outcomes rather than possibly ruining the rest of their lives for a silly youthful mistake, then these situations will arise less often Sure the dealer carrying around 100 pills in his pocket will still be fucked and I don't have any compassion for him, but if a young guy or girl ends up with a criminal conviction for a small bag of pills or meth bought for them and their friends, I think this is a bit tough. I travel a fair bit, and I know that If I had a criminal conviction for drugs there would be a lot of places I wouldn't have been able to see (I might not be living in Australia now!) Three of my past employers and my partners last two employers and all her future employers in her industry have done and will do criminal record checks. I dare say I would have been disadvantaged if I had ever been charged with a drugs offence. I definitly see where you are coming from Ace and that we had a different interpretation of insp Duthies statement. Yes I think it nonsensical to swallow shit in your pocket to avoid detection (especially when you can just drop it on the ground), but some people just don't think things through especially when sniffer dogs are runing all over the shop and I would hope that the police realise this as a possibility rather than dismissing it as ludicrous as Duthie states LOL Ace I'm glad you don't think I'm an idiot and agree with everything you have said! My main gripe isn't even with the police who are just doing a job, but with the zero tolerance policy. It needs to be reviewed and rewritten to actually minimise harm that may occur and avoid the need for convictions - atleast on a first and minor offence.

Um Thanks Ace Firstly I think pills are shit and don't take them, or meth, its all crap. All I was saying is that its stupid to think that people aren't going to take whats in their pocket which may be a few points or a couple of extra pills than get a criminal conviction and face the consequences of that. Cause some people will. I didn't make a judgement call on whether that makes a person an idiot or not, only that I'm sure it happens and that Insp Duthie is naive for saying that that is "absolute nonsense" which I take to mean that he doesn't believe that it happens or that the police presence would catalyse such a situation in any way . Who knows what some people do when they are off their heads. I wouldn't be dumb enough to go there in the first place let alone for carrying anything shitty like that around. I honestly think the whole rave thing is pretty dumb For the record ace I wouldn't swallow a bag of pills, but I also aint that stupid that I'd go and hand them over to the nearest cop, But I wouldn't find myself in that situation anyway I also have stated that I think hospital staff have every right to be angry when confonted with people fucked up on too much meth, just as they have the right to be pissed at people who smoke ciggies till they catch cancer, or eat so much they endanger their lives

LOL we've probably crossed paths ourselves at some point in time! and yeah, we've been privi to a few of those vids, it was the reason we got one of those new fandangal VCR players back in the early 80's And yeah there are some real stayers in the health system, and it is usually the more down to earth docs who are in there for the good of all. It seems to be a real shit fight between them and the beaurocrats to maintain the essential services in the public system. and Back to the thread This is one of the most naive statements I have read If insp Duthie is that stupid that he thinks it "absolute nonsense" that people may consider this as an alternative to facing the australian justice systems zero tolerance policy, then that really is ridiculous

LOL me too! Mine too, They probably have met that 7 degrees of speration thing is scarily true! You got me, I was trying to duck out before this point was made It was screaming at me the whole time. That over eating and smoking are diseases in themselves much more obscure than the secondary and much more obvious diseases resulting from the addictions, but I still firmly believe that the human phsyche can overcome this, all people need are the right tools. This however is a much harder point to debate and be so onesided, and I don't believe anyone in a hospital can provide these tools effectively. For this you really do need a true healer I'll get off my high horse now LOL

This may be true, but when the cause, effect and preventative measures are well documented and made a matter of public notice one can't help but become angered. My father is a doctor and he becomes irrate when people try to pass the buck in such a way. The health system is collapsing under peoples self absorbant lifestyles and decisions and the consequences of these. To make an analogy in my line of work, say I run out of sulphur and a parcel of sulphur meant to preserve a product is lost in transit and the product perishes, one can not get angry at any particular individual, but when someone is asked to order sulphur repeatedly and they ignore you till the product perishes, I have every right to become angry because the situation could and should have been avoided. I liken this to someone getting cancer from eating a diet containing a little known carcinogen unbeknown to them as opposed to someone getting cancer from chuffing down a pack a day with a picture of a ravaged lung on the front of it Both self induced and probably avoidable, but completely different situations generateing completely different responses. I don't know anyone who wouldn't anger at the situation that has occured in my line of work, and see little difference between that situation and that situation that a doctor faces probably every day. I completely agree that healing takes more forms than eating pills, and that was indeed my point, that working in a hospital doesn't make you a healer. but if we were to try and fill the hospitals with only true healers, we wouldn't even have a health system as they are far and few between. I have many friends who work in the health sector and yes, unfortuanetly for some its all about the cheque at the end of the week. But it is a job and people will get angry when they are faced with a lack of care or 'poor management' in any profession, and that is what obesity through over eating and cancer via smoking is, a complete lack of care for and poor management of ones own vessel. Not only that its an epedemic, god they must be sick of seeing lives needlessly wasted! were going to have to agree to disagree on this one, cause you aren't going to change my perspective, and I'm sure I'm not going to sway your's either but I can understand why people can and do get angry with patients who would probably heal better if they weren't treated by someone who is pissed at them (or at least with the general malaise associated with these self inflicted diseases that are well publicised)

Um I would say yes to the first two and no to the third Why shouldn't a 'healer' and by this I mean a member of the hospital staff, be peeved that they are wasting valuable resources when the circumstances could and should have been avoided. With a schizophrenic patient the circumstances are very different. Even on their meds they are still mentally ill, and the meds often make them feel very uncomfortable with themselves, it is such a terrible struggle for them when they are half sane. I am sure their 'healers' would be more compasionate in their regard for such a situation I also believe that many hospital staff are not true healers and are just doing a job. I don't feel comfortable about applying that term to anyone who has a part in a patients treatment as the term 'healer' would then have far too broad a definition A true healer would probably not be angered by anyones physical distress (obviously I am not a true healer, cause these scenarios do anger me and am probably somewhat of a hypocrite as I do not treat my body with the upmost respect that it may deserve although I eat well, don't drink or smoke, I don't keep myself in peak physical or mental condition)

Info found

No, pretty much straight away Not you! Thunderideal did, and I found that that had no bearing on the spin as I could easily remove all of those functions and still get it to change direction

Oh hahahahah I'm going to slap you so silly tomorrow you great big shaven ball sack

No, cause I can cover up the shadow and still get it to spin both ways not a problem Nothing to do with looking at the foot either, maybe it helps some people though cause of the thought patterns involved Breast entry appears perfect both ways I can cover up more than half the body and still get it to spin either way on demand Why do you say trixy TI? Because your brain is perceiving it in a different way? Isn't that what it is all about? I can also cut the picture of just below the breasts by moving my screen down and still get it going either way, ie cant see hands are most of the arms, In fact just tried it with only the head and no other part of her body and can get her head to spin both ways easily enough! LOL Thats funny shit, so yeah I really dont know how it works! But its got nothing to do with shadows feet or arms or the height of body parts, but probably that its spinning slightly off axis and the way your brain interprates this as a directional function?

So what time do the talks on friday start? For us straglers who will be making it in later on friday? Need time to pitch the tent and all that!!