foolsbreath

pot up the coir mix and then flush by putting hose in pot or dipping pot in buckets of water till water runs clean (or measure with ec or hydrometer), can use one big pot or seperate into small pots ready for planting once flushed Then plant cacti ;) ( you might want to wait for soil to dry at this time of the year?)

You could also use like rear sway bars as the axles and hang the load like a basket. Just cut flat drill the ends of the sway bars to accommodate the normal bike thread, brace with some RHS and weld an outrigger like bar with a lug drilled in it to fit the wheel between Here I drew a picture, excuse the poor art work Could do it with 2 or 4 wheels I suppose If you used 2 wheels You'd need to get a pair of front forks weld a bar across the top, do a bar or swaybar across the bottom and make a prism like brace from the axel ends and the middle of the cross bar at the top. I drew a nother picture my 10c worth anyways

got sent this little test for your brain hemisphere usage and predominance for visual or auditory functions. At the end you can go back through the questions and it shows the meanings of each answer, and tells you about your profile Click on the link and then on brain.exe near the bottom of the paragraph http://www.jcu.edu.au/studying/services/st...lls/learningst/ I actually thought it was quite accurate, although dubious at the outset when the Mrs did it, it said due to her brain usage pattern, some people could perceive her as slightly off balance! LOL Must be right Nah, but she was about half and half I was strongly left and visual, although when reviewing the questions, for the few questions that said, this is a prototypical right side answer, or only right side people will answer this, or highly dominant right side answer, I always picked that one. There was only 2 or three like that. Bit of fun if nothing else, have a go

Thanks mate!! Catch up soon!

Tramadol Its an atypical opiate most closely related to codein, My dentist in NZ prescribed it to me for tooth pain, but it was next to useless, as most opiates are for me. Its widely prescribed to cancer patients

If you have no luck, I can add some to the next order, might be a few weeks though.

Cheers Tripi!! Legend!

Umm, and was updated by the thread originator yesterday, so Luck is not needed VP Live by had nice prints in the last round of offers for those interested!

Yeah any body got any loph pollen available specially like non williamsi to make interesting crosses, but anything will do! Thanks FB

Best Birthday wishes ED! Hope your feeling up to a wee drink or something!!

I'm a cat. I have white fur, blue eyes and a zest for life. I am deaf and partly blind and my favorite spot to sit is on top of the subwoofer in the back of the zd fairlane when we go cruising I have been shot, runover twice lost down the drain and stuck up a tree for 2 days, have aids and kidney failure I am foolsbreath and now you will only find me here No but seriously, Foolsbreath died last year, and for a long time I could feel him sitting there or brushing against my leg An old friend had experiences with ghosts/spirits/souls, to the point where one day a woman came to see him out of the blue to burn candles for the dead. They had driven him very dark and troubled. I like this idea Shiva, and although it may not mean we have a soul per say, we leave an imprint of energy, of ourselves before returning to the collective conscience, ready for rebirth, or whatever happens from there A bit of all of the above, an organism with a soul who has been conditioned by genetics and environment to behave as we do. And noow you know where my stage name is from

Nah thats cool, ;) I do understand it pretty well But I wouldn't like the idea of buying licenses for such things. I believe the government would tax such purchases ridiculously Secondly and more importantly, how private will this sort of thing be? One would presumedly not want employers, neighbors and a host of other people finding out about one holding such licenses for fear of discrimination, and In this day in age, nothing is really private if on eis determined enough to source such information. how about you hold a pole to see the interest in such a scheme within a community like this? I would be interested in the results You seem to have analysed and presented your scheme with both social and economic elements, which is the norm (also from a environmental element sometimes). Something I think is left out of such analysis is the human factor. Humans are unpredictable and I don't know what the result of such a scheme would be if implemented, but what I do know is some people just get off on breaking the law or at least skirting the fringes of it, and such a scheme would just not appeal Post that pole and prove me wrong!!

Hash! most tests I have seen indicate hash is high in CBD low in THC, most likely due to the processing Bush weed is probably lower in THC too?

I saw a program on four corners or land line about a company exporting roo meat. They were doing a booming business! I know of a place near armidale where roo's are kept in fenced paddocks. They are quite happy, but easily stressed if there is a lot of activity in the paddock, but as long as you give them an option to go into an adjoining paddock they are usually quite happy I can try and track down the vid if you want, I think I remember someone who had it on tape.

Mr Spock, I don't think your scheme would work at all This will in effect segregate people and label people The government will never be able to control all aspects of manufacture and distribution it is impossible, especially if they are charging huge amounts of money and tax on their products No one will want to buy a license, making people want to buy off a dealer even more, especially if they loose their right to health insurance, how silly! You will probably get people making stuff at home to avoid all these administrative hassles which may result in more fatal OD's Precursors for all will be more readily available because the government is now importing everything it needs to manufacture here (shit will go missing, its human nature) How do you seperate between a plant and a drug Mr Spock?, as many drugs are direct products of the plant? I take it you don't agree with the recreational use of plants either? In the governments eye, most of the plants that we wish to grow will be considered drugs (especially if they are tightening restrictions on manufacture and precursors etc) and therefor none of us will be able to enjoy our hobby without the risk of getting executed I think most 'drugs' are innocuous, there is only a handful that are addictive and hurtful and half of these are already available on prescription (eg high grade opiates, benzo's, hypnotics etc etc). I have no interest in such things, question to ask, is why do some? The only good point you made in education. Harm minimisation is really the only cure, that and improved mental health systems. I think most people that go on to have a problem with the problem drugs have previous need for such care, take the drugs off them and you might find increased rates of suicide, self harm etc etc, any way to release the emotions or forget about them? Well I have been just a little bit critical of your idea, It gives the government an awful amount of power over the people, no one group should have a monopoly on anything and people should not have their civil liberties impinged in such a way Nay, that is the wrong road to travel down IMO Edit: spelling ;)

look out on ebay for water bed heaters, much more better EDIT: Heres one now! I got one about 2 years ago (it was already 7 years old) and is going strong, temp range from about 20-40 C Used it for home brewing, mushroom boxes, grow boxes and general heat mat, just got to place the Thermostat for correct temp, easy if your using a grow box etc, otherwise you can put in soil or rig up a thermostat box (an mt box with the sensor in it placed on the heat mat)

The world heats up The effects of this increase are already appearing. Since the end of the last century temperatures have drifted up by 0.6 °C. The 1990s were the hottest decade on record. More and more storms –a byproduct of global warming– are raging around the world. Asian monsoons are becoming less predictable. Unusually extreme droughts and floods are wreaking havoc in China, East Africa, the Middle East, Europe, North America, New Zealand and the Indian subcontinent. Warmer, more CO2-laden waters are killing coral reefs, which protect coastlines and nurture fisheries. An area of Arctic ice the size of Texas has been lost over the past 20 years, with the ice over the Arctic ocean thinning since the late 1950s from 3.1 to 1.8 metres, while Antarctica’s Larsen Ice Shelf A has broken away from the continent. The future threatens even worse. The surplus carbon dioxide that is already in the atmosphere will continue to wreak its effects for one to two centuries, while still more is added. Sea levels are already set to rise by 50 centimetres by 2100, and if the Western Antarctic ice mass slips into the sea, they could go up six metres. Grain yields are likely to decline dangerously in the South over the next 50 years due to climate-induced soil degradation, floods, droughts and increased pest infestations. Disease-carrying insects such as malarial mosquitoes are poised to spread into new regions. Many species and ecosystems will disappear, unable to adapt to the pace of change. Millions of “climate refugees” may soon be on the move. Worst of all are possible runaway effects. Rising temperatures could easily destabilize ice-like methane hydrates on the sea floor or beneath the Arctic tundra, releasing billions of tonnes of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more powerful even than CO2. Rising temperatures could also cause forests to die off rapidly and peatlands to dry out, rapidly turning carbon reservoirs such as Amazon forests into massive carbon dioxide sources. Polar ice-melts, meanwhile, could accelerate warming by reducing the amount of energy reflected from the poles. They could also have a dramatic effect on ocean currents that transport heat around the globe. For example, the Gulf Stream could shut down, plunging Northern Europe into freezing cold at the same time other parts of the world heat up. The rise in levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, in short, cannot continue. Adding as little as another 200 billion tonnes will result in a 2-3 °C rise in temperatures –a heat wave unprecedented in human history. Adding 300 or more would be catastrophic, especially in that it might trigger runaway heating effects that could make the planet uninhabitable. Yet more than 4,000 billion tonnes of carbon in fossil fuels is waiting to be recovered and burned, over three-quarters of it coal. It would seem that the vast bulk of this must be left in the ground. Two approaches to global warming During the early 1990s, the corporations most responsible for the mining and consumption of fossil fuels denied that the problem of industrial-caused global warming existed or that it was serious enough to require concerted political action. They had a great deal of influence. Climate negotiators from the US –whose CO2 emissions are roughly equal to those of 135 Southern countries, or three billion people, put together– continually received instructions from industry groups such as the Global Climate Coalition, who spent millions of dollars spreading scientific disinformation. However, the events of the last few years have made it more difficult to deny that global warming has begun, and nearly impossible to pretend that consumption of remaining reserves of fossil fuels would not lead to disaster. That leaves only two approaches to the crisis. One approach is to reduce fossil fuel use dramatically and quickly. That means focusing first on reducing the “luxury” emissions of those who have already used up more than their fair share of global carbon sinks and stocks, while promoting energy conservation and energy efficiency, worldwide use of solar and other renewable energy sources, and ecological instead of industrial agriculture. The second approach involves speculative programs to modify earth’s biosphere and crust to allow them to absorb more CO2. Promising to make it «safer» for richer nations and groups to continue rapid, high-level consumption of fossil fuels for as long as possible, this approach enjoys great favour among fossil-fuel producing and consuming industries and many officials in the US and some other Northern governments. The US Department of Energy, for instance, is currently exploring grandiose schemes for intensively “manipulating” terrestrial and ocean ecosystems and the earth’s crust so that they can store three to six times more carbon than at present, in order to make possible “continued large-scale use of fossil fuels”. This general approach –and the appeal to tree plantations in particular– is supported by a wide range of technocrats, brokers, consultants, think tanks, multilateral agencies, forestry companies and even a few non-government organizations (NGOs). The two approaches are sometimes seen as complementary ways of checking the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere. Yet they could not be more different both in their politics and in their probable effectiveness in abating global warming. Taken from a briefing paper presented by the world rainforest movement

This thread should be moved to chill space BB is the biggest load of shit around, cant believe people don't have anything better to do than watch this crap

Lucky for some but not for all!

Woohoo! thanks Naja! 13 again! my lucky number

Your a good sort Hazza!!

Thats cool mate!!

well yeah, thats it, isn't it, you can only revegetate or avegetate so much land but there is plenty of demand for wood products and if stopping illegal deforestation in places lake Indo and Peru etc is possible, the price of timber will indicate its true value making agro forestry a much more desirable field for land holders to move into. As long as cut wood is not allowed to decompose, it is storing its carbon indefinitely and tree plantations are not fertilised at all, infact there is no carbon required to set up a forestry block unless direct seeding is used with machinery, producing a small initial loss of carbon and of course the harvesting procedures. In fact, by changing land use from pasture or cropping to forestry, you will be significantly reducing carbon loss through soils and stopping carbon and nitrogen being lost through fertilization. Dangers in Australia are of course mainly fire and disease, but if any planting is to be accredited, these factors are calculated into the final equation eg any planting must realize a loss of say 20% (not true figures) to cover losses seen through natural causes. there are also limitations set by the Kyoto protocol for carbon sinks to be recognized internationally, ie, areas planted must be into revegetation, and areas not cleared before 1990 within a localized area to which the offsets are to be returned etc etc to ensure that there is a biodiversity out come as well as sequestration. If such criteria are not met, one may not be able to trade carbon stocks if that was the aim of the plantation

This made me chuckle untitled.bmp