PDA

View Full Version : The Trouble with the Industry !!







damaircon
02-07-2011, 08:29 AM
Having recently covered the new f gas course I was amazed at just how many companys send there engineers on the course from all different backgrounds , but with no refrigeration training what so ever. Thank fully the course I was on , people were told they could not complete the practical due to incompetence. ( how many training centres would do this i wonder ?? )
Anyway It did make it quite clear how little regard other trades have for refrigeration and was quite nice to see people struggling on the test rig. I may add there were people who were in the trade who could not set up oxy/acetyline, had no knowledge of OFN. etc etc.
The most hoffific thing for me was on returning to our office the stores was having a clear out. We uncovered various quantities of refrigerant in many bottles . Approx 60 kilo of r22 and mixes,etc.
I explanied to the firm what action needed to happen and the cost for reclaiming and destroying.
the awnser i got was " can you just let it go, thats what the last engineer used to do. what harm can it do? "
this came from a company director. Again not a fridge engineer, but they have been servicing and installing for the past 20 years . I have recently joined the company , I feel it puts me in a moral dilema working for people with no regard for the planet let alone the trade. This unfortunatly has been similar throughout my career . In nearly all my previous jobs the managment have been non refrigeration engineers, or have a lack of experience on the tools. Is it not about time there was mandatory training for all levels including managment and directors!!

Gary
02-07-2011, 04:09 PM
So... people are ignoring the laws and your solution is to pass more laws?

The environmental laws are ignored because they are nothing more than a money grab. They point at the environment with one hand and pick your pocket with the other hand.

damaircon
02-07-2011, 08:31 PM
hi, my point was to make people involved in the industry qualified , so as to improve our status. It is no point making it illegal to do this and that if managment dont understand the trade or current regualtions. AND YES our planet is important and the ban of cfc s is a good thing . you have to use the law to control this. The same as in this country , you can not touch natural gas , for safety reasons unless qualified and registered. this also is a criminal act

Kev The Tool
02-07-2011, 08:34 PM
I hate to admit it but gary is spot on, the restrictions are in place to make money, if they really cared about industry practice they would police it better. i know loads of company's and "engineers" who regularly flout the law where gas regs is concerned, oh the story's i could tell. but who would listen.
Kev

r.bartlett
02-07-2011, 09:59 PM
I hate to admit it but Gary is spot on, the restrictions are in place to make money, if they really cared about industry practice they would police it better. i know loads of company's and "engineers" who regularly flout the law where gas regs is concerned, oh the story's i could tell. but who would listen.
Kev


No you are both wrong. It is the duty of every citizen to uphold and maintain the laws and to assist the police in carrying out their duty.

If you know that the law is being flouted then as a citizen it is your dutyto report those who don't. Just sitting and moaning that the law isn't being policed properly doesn't help anyone apart from those who flout the law.How do they know what you know unless you tell them??????

. F-Gas has a reporting telephone number. Bloody well use it. If you complywhy allow those who don't?


Report them:

F-Gas Support Helpline

0161 874 3663 (9-5 Mon-Fri)
F-Gas Support Helpdesk

fgas-support@enviros.com (fgas-support@enviros.com)
Make sure you get a written confirmation that they have received the information and report them to the police if they do not act.




I absolutely intend to inform every Tom **** and Harry customer that we comply and they should not use those that don't. I gain by informing customers of their duty to uphold the law (not that all will of course) they gain by being informed about a law they may not know about and those that don't comply suffer by their work pool getting smaller. Isn't that what we're all striving for, a better industry for all??


Don't complain if you let them get away with it by saying it's not my job toreport breaches. It is and the fact that no one does is the exact reason this legislation was brought in in the first place. We complain about the Nanny state but refuse to self police. If our industry took itself and it's workforce seriously it would have enforced this years ago. But they didn't and everyoneturns a blind eye, Then complain that the government acted instead. Square that circle and you see we need protecting from ourselves.

There was a piece on R5 about a community self policing it's estate as the tenants were given the power to evict those who disobeyed the rules (which were far more restrictive than the Councils own regulations btw) The result was a massive reduction in crime as tenants suddenly because team players beholding to their fellow tenants.. Crime and vandalism went down hugely as a result and the estate became a desirable placeto live. IE they didn't need the police to tell them what to do: they did itthemselves.

This is what we need to do. Self police and the trade will bloom to be adesirable trade to be in. Turn a blind eye and we have exactly what we havenow.. It's your choice, my choice and everyone out there's choice. Just don't moan if you sit stum.

Stand up for us all and together we can be proud. Till that happens we remain divided and derided.

Make those who don't comply shape up or ship out or you are responsible forholding us all back

And yes I will report those who are in breach and do so knowing it will make the industry a better place for us all

Gary
03-07-2011, 01:39 AM
Didn't the Nazis use that strategy?

r.bartlett
03-07-2011, 08:39 AM
Didn't the Nazis use that strategy?

A better analogy would have been the East German Stasi but it's a very weak comment and doesn't really work. Fly tipping is hardly the crime of the century but it was made illegal. Why you no doubt ask? well to protect the country from small minded people who suggest "It's only a couple of ton and I have to pay to get rid of it"

Well we all suffer from these small minded idiots who can't see the greater good and it's us that have to pay to get it cleared up. Everyone moans that they have to pay to dump but no one shops those who don't. The legit trader is penalized by the fly tipper, the customer is paying the fly tipper to dispose of their rubbish properly and the tax payer picks up the tab..You may see it as a victory for the fly tipper getting one over the system. I see it as someone getting paid to do a job, not doing what he was paid for and then asking us to pay for it ....I need him/you like a hole in the head.

Back on track:

I am surprised by someone who sells training books seems to be against training engineers to a higher standard. The industry has ignored the warnings for 50 years about cleaning up it's act so it's hardly a surprise the government steps in and enforces regulation.

And that is all it is. Regulation to raise standards whilst protecting the consumer from the unscrupulous and helping to protect the environment. There are no losers here past the small minded and untrained.

Time you reevaluated your belief system about just caring about yourself and the cowboy's littering our trade.

Grizzly
03-07-2011, 08:58 AM
Don't be to hash on each other Guys.
This will all take time and yes some of the regs are viewed with suspicion or contempt.
When you complete the F gas training You as an individual are made responsible.
That is a very big statement Dependant upon how it is viewed.
The changes are slow but they are happening.
As more of us comply and adopt fewer will be accepted for bending the rules.
Even the rules are being adjusted as we go along.

More and more companies who have to pay out to comply are becoming less and less tolerant of those that don't.

My own answer when requested to do anything that I deem to not follow the guidelines nowadays, is to say sorry "F Gas" does not allow me to do that. If you wish to do so then that is your choice.

Grizzly

damaircon
03-07-2011, 09:48 AM
my point again - Mandatory training for any one involved in the industry, at all levels !!!
end off

joe-ice
03-07-2011, 11:55 AM
With gary ,money racket ,get all these tickets then have to go back every so many years and renew them .If you get a degree from university do you have to go back and renew it?.Its all just another form of taxation

Gary
03-07-2011, 04:36 PM
The Earth is getting warmer... therefore you must give me your money and obey my commands.

The first part of that sentence may or may not be true. The second part of that sentence is total BS. An excuse to rob you and dictate your behavior. Seems the world is cram packed full of thieves and dictators... and their accomplices.

Goober
03-07-2011, 09:58 PM
Gary,

And your solution to the issue is?

Stephen.

install monkey
03-07-2011, 10:26 PM
were all responsible for ensuring good practices on site and back in the yard,maybe a service manager or other office muppet should do the 2079 to ensure good practises and make sure there engineers are all preaching from the same page. also a few fines will soon shape up the industry. wholesalers should only supply refrigerant to qualified f gas engineers,each condenser should have the f gas history to hand,not hidden away in a file,engineers should prove that leaks are repaiared and submit photo's of repair. also all aircon/fridge systems inc under 3kg should be serviced and included in the f gas regs to ensure the lil corner shop with the rough a**e installs are not getting topped up every 3mths for a quick foreigner.-rant over thanks

mad fridgie
03-07-2011, 10:27 PM
I do not an an issue in making better use of the earths resources (for what ever reason you believe in) I do believe that the majority of the hype is a money making scam. Self regulation does not seem to work, so I agree that some form is required. My argument is that just about anybody can get a "F"gas or similar certification, I almost get the impression you do the couple day course, and as long as you are there you pass. How many fail? In the costumers eyes (who no nothing in many caases) you must be a qualified/competent refrig/ac engineer with "F" gas. This just makes a mockery of the trade. No wonder we no longer have the respect that we once had. Maybe it is the price/supply of refrigerant which will determine, the quality of workmanship, not direct regulation. Tax at source, like petrol, smokes, booze and use the funds for apprentiship training (thats a wish)

Gary
04-07-2011, 03:55 PM
Gary,

And your solution to the issue is?

Stephen.

If we assume that there really is an issue, what makes you think there is a solution? What if there is no solution? I am told that in 200 years the state of Florida will be under water. Are you listening, Florida residents? Better start packing. You have a mere 200 years to move out.

r.bartlett
04-07-2011, 05:59 PM
With gary ,money racket ,get all these tickets then have to go back every so many years and renew them .If you get a degree from university do you have to go back and renew it?.Its all just another form of taxation

OK I'll bite, firstly there is a big difference between an academic degree and a trade registration. I am surprised you need telling this??


Secondly we all know this hasn't been a resounding success with various rogue trainers driving round with a rig hitched up and a guaranteed pass come what may. These will thin out as this massive lump travels down the snake and training slows over the next few years. Then those who come up for a re-test (assuming that is what happens) in a few years time will suddenly find it hard to get one of these rogue trainers as they would have come and gone. Then they have to actually pass the exam rather than be told the answers. So they will have to up their game somewhat


Thirdly exactly what tax is 2079 actually raising ?

damaircon
04-07-2011, 08:07 PM
I was on a job the other day doing some electrical work, and there was two split systems in boxes , looking like they needed to be installed some where. I asked the owner " do you need these installing, we can provide a price for installl etc. " they replied " no thanks our builder is going to do it . .. they were Lg by the way and not b and q units . that is whats wrong with the industry, no respect for our trade or the skills to do it. If that was a combi boiler on site, no one would of offered to install unless corgi or gas safe registered, for fear of comebacks.
( if there was a death two years later they would still look to see who installed it)
I could also install gas appliances , but i would not do it in a customers house.its just to risky, I dont want to go to prison. Its taken a generation for the refrigeration industry to get to this , so action is a good thing, to boost our incomes and status.most of all our incomes....!!

damaircon
04-07-2011, 08:08 PM
thanks r bartlett , i will bear in mind what you say, trouble is we all need a job right now, just as long as im above the law , sod the comapany

thebigcheese
04-07-2011, 10:09 PM
tell him youl get rid of the r22 ( current price is around reclaimed r22 for around 19 pound a kg )

Fri3Oil System
05-07-2011, 07:02 AM
I was on a job the other day doing some electrical work, and there was two split systems in boxes , looking like they needed to be installed some where. I asked the owner " do you need these installing, we can provide a price for installl etc. " they replied " no thanks our builder is going to do it . .. they were Lg by the way and not b and q units . that is whats wrong with the industry, no respect for our trade or the skills to do it. If that was a combi boiler on site, no one would of offered to install unless corgi or gas safe registered, for fear of comebacks...

In AREA, (Air Conditioning and Refrigeration European Association), (http://www.area-eur.be/) as an example, they are trying to get the splits systems sold without refrigerant inside. This way, they could only be handled by qualified installers who have passed their exams. In other words, it would keep builders, plumbers, or carpenters away from the AC installs.

New regulations are not a matter of taxation, but a way to get a more professional market/industry, with a loyal competence among the actors, more environmentally responsible trade.



tell him youl get rid of the r22 ( current price is around reclaimed r22 for around 19 pound a kg )

Why don't you recycle what there is in the bank? In Ireland there should be a few thousands tons of R22 still in the installs which are about to be retrofitted.

Regards,

Nando.

Gary
05-07-2011, 07:40 AM
In AREA, (Air Conditioning and Refrigeration European Association), (http://www.area-eur.be/) as an example, they are trying to get the splits systems sold without refrigerant inside. This way, they could only be handled by qualified installers who have passed their exams. In other words, it would keep builders, plumbers, or carpenters away from the AC installs.


Maybe they can get refrigerators sold without refrigerant, too. Then we could stick it to everyone. Just think how professional that would make us all look. And we can pretend we are saving the planet.

Fri3Oil System
05-07-2011, 08:16 AM
Hi Gary,

that would mean that the only guys who could install those units, would be qualified workers, and definitely, that's a way to create a more professional and environmentally conscious trade. Obviously, my point of view (and many others as far as I know). But this is how we see it in Europe, where there is a bigger concern about Environment... or as you'd say, a bigger will to tax installers ;)

Regards,

Nando.

joe-ice
05-07-2011, 12:37 PM
ok maybe i picked a bad example ,when you pass your driving test do you suddenly forget how to drive 3 years later and so have to resit your test.i have no problem with training to better protect the environment and improve skills,im all for it .i dislike when it is turned into a gravy train with mandatory retesting.

Gary
05-07-2011, 03:06 PM
I understand the contractor's dilemma. You have been robbed by the government and in order to survive, you need to pass this along to your customers. There are those who manage to avoid being robbed, thus circumventing the plan... and you would like to believe they are the bad guys, so you buy into all of the 'saving the planet' crap.

I have no problem at all with believing politicians are the bad guys in all of this. They are the worst of the worst, scum of the earth, bottom feeding, blood sucking thieves and dictators.

mikeref
06-07-2011, 12:08 AM
The Earth is getting warmer... therefore you must give me your money and obey my commands.

The first part of that sentence may or may not be true. The second part of that sentence is total BS. An excuse to rob you and dictate your behavior. Seems the world is cram packed full of thieves and dictators... and their accomplices.
There is no exception to your comment in this part of the world either. Carbon tax is set to be introduced here on everything that produces CO2!! Getting back on the subject now, think of how many years vehicles have been on the roads, and with traffic cops and cameras everywhere, how many drivers continue to bend the rules? I think refrigeration rules and regulations will continue to face an uphill battle for some time yet.. Mike.

Magoo
06-07-2011, 01:46 AM
carbon tax, is just that : a tax grab, globle warming is scare mongering. The commodities trading market just love it.

MikeHolm
06-07-2011, 11:54 AM
Didn't the Nazis use that strategy?

Gary, do you listen to Glen Beck a lot:D

We have had this discussion before and I am sorry but we humans, technologically advanced as we are, have not advanced in humility or in how we view our place in this world. Many of us continue to believe we have no influence on the planet, or are too small minded to see the repercussions of our actions outside our own free will and pocket book.

When 99% of all climate scientists say there is a problem, there is a problem. Period. They may disagree on the extent of it or how to fix it (assuming you believe we should care) and the only scientists who don't agree are paid by people like the Koch brothers (they own oil and coal plants around the US) who bankroll the Teaparty. It is in their financial interest that nothing be done about.

We simply have come to a time in our history when our actions have a visible effect on the planet. We put the government in place, we ask for proper regulations and it is up to us to see that they are correct and that they work for MOST people.

If you leave it to the corporations (who we don't elect) and not our governments (who we do elect), nothing will be done because it is not in the interest of a corporation to do anything that will reduce the next quarters profits. This is the difference between the "social contract" between European corporations and American ones. European corporations know they work within a community and American ones believe they are separate from it. I generalize but it is actually pretty true. (if you stick 500 million americans in an area the size of Texas, there would be a war. Europe exists and works because the lessons of the WW2 created the current system......and the longest period of peace in history)

Back to the certifications, when I got my gas ticket in 93, there was 100,000 tickets floating around Ontario (population 12 million). Some people said they did it as a hobby. The govt wanted to get the number down to 25,000 so the the courses went from a two day event to a 3 month event and a lot more money. Is this wrong? It serves a good purpose.

taz24
06-07-2011, 02:37 PM
.

I think it is common knowledge I work as a trainer and assessor within the fridge industry.

I never hide that fact and I alway try to keep a ballenced opinion and attitude.

I'm not totaly convinced about what causes Climate Change.

Maybe the world is going through a cycle and it is totaly natural, maybe it is mankind
causeing the problems. If I'm honest I think it is a combination of both factors (natural and human),
but whatever the causes it will not affect most of us here on this forum or in our lifetimes.

If it is happening then it will be our kids, kids (grandchildren) that will have to deal with it.

So do we say "sod you I have had a good life rapeing the world and now I'm off somewhere
better" You can deal with the crap I leave behind, or do we say "maybe I'm at fault here and
maybe I can do somthing about it".

Us doing somthing about it costs us money, not lives, just money. If we do sod all and we are
to blame, well what then??? If we do sod all and we are not to blame???

I don't think there is one answer and there is deffinately not one solution, but doing nothing
will not help! Doing somthing costs us money!

Gary we have had discussions like this in the past and we agreed to disagree for the most part
and although I respect your view I think it is tainted by a bigger mistrust of anyone in authority.

Nobody in authority can prove to you anything other than what you know and I think that has
more to do with other things not only climate change.

I'm not nieve enough to know that big bussness and politics are a key player in the descisions
being made and I know that all descissions made are not for the best of reasons, but and there
is always a but.

BUT if we are a liitle bit responsible for the way the world is and we can affect it by a little, doing
the right thing, then that only costs us money. In a hundred years it will cost lives.

Think about the practicalities of 1 billion people being forced to moved around the world because
their part of the world is flooded or too arid to support life. Where will they live????

Most people in Westernised countries with stable political governments will not be affected.
It is the poorest and most unstable countries that will be affected the most.

And I repeat at the moment it is only costing money....

Not an answer most agree with and I have no answers that will save the planet, but if I know of ilegal
practices I will express my dissatisfaction to those concerned and ultimately the opption to report is there.

If mandatory qulifications brings the standard of my trade up that can only be for the good.
I have been in my trade for more than 30 years and I have seen so many changes both good and bad,
but the one overiding factor that realy scares me is then down skilling of the industry and the lack
of ability in some so called proffesionals.

taz

.

MikeHolm
06-07-2011, 02:46 PM
here, here taz. I've seen a lot of the data and I see the changes as being far faster than anything nature has done on its own time so I do believe we are mostly to blame. It has nothing to do with government as government only does what the people who push it, want. In the US, most of those "people" are corporations. If we can make good regulations that mitigate the problem, do it.

Gary
06-07-2011, 06:42 PM
Way back when this all started, the original plan was to phase out the suspect refrigerants at the manufacturing level... period. That was the entire plan, a reasonable response, most effective, least intrusive and least expensive, eliminating nearly all of the problem. It enjoyed near unanimous support throughout the refrigeration industry (including myself).

What followed, all of the regulation, taxation and micromanagement of the entire industry was well beyond the point of diminishing returns, accomplishing little or nothing... other than enriching the government and stifling competition. It's all a big rip-off and nothing else.

Is the industry being de-skilled? You bet. This is going to continue and it is going to get much worse. Eventually the systems will be truly self-diagnostic and the end user will be able to repair/replace them... without calling in a contractor. Window and/or through the wall units will be made more attractive, less noisy and much more efficient. Only the very rich will have split systems... and few contractors will be needed to service them.

Why will this happen? Because all of the regulations, licenses and government micromanagement are adding enormously to the cost of hiring a contractor. We will be priced right out of the market.

In the meantime, there will be those who find ways to avoid being robbed. As you may have noticed, unjust laws are difficult, if not impossible, to enforce.

Gary
06-07-2011, 06:57 PM
If it is happening then it will be our kids, kids (grandchildren) that will have to deal with it.


What we are going to leave our children and grandchildren is a world where they are robbed mercilessly and their every waking moment is dictated by government edict. A world in which they are told how they must walk, talk, look, act and think. A world in which they are enslaved by their government... all for the "greater good".

Quality
06-07-2011, 07:53 PM
Window and/or through the wall units will be made more attractive, less noisy and much more efficient. Only the very rich will have split systems

Thank god my job is safe as I have never touched either

Gary
06-07-2011, 09:39 PM
Thank god my job is safe as I have never touched either

I think you are missing the point. A high quality self-contained A/C unit, reasonably priced and easy to install/repair/replace could put half the contractors in our industry out of work. As contractor prices rise, window units look better and better. They are sold everywhere and any Tom, **** or Harry can install them. If they become popular, your job is not safe.

MikeHolm
06-07-2011, 09:41 PM
What we are going to leave our children and grandchildren is a world where they are robbed mercilessly and their every waking moment is dictated by government edict. A world in which they are told how they must walk, talk, look, act and think. A world in which they are enslaved by their government... all for the "greater good".

Do you want to tell me what would happen if we had no government? First thing would be every man for himself...and when enough people have been killed by the lawlessness a group of people will stand up and say we need to organize and elect a leader and.......on you go. But this is not 2-3 hundred years ago. The corporations are in control and they will step in BECAUSE THEY CAN and they already have the resources. Corporations are not altruistic, its not what they were invented for.

Quality
06-07-2011, 09:53 PM
Do you want to tell me what would happen if we had no government? First thing would be every man for himself...and when enough people have been killed by the lawlessness a group of people will stand up and say we need to organize and elect a leader and.......on you go. But this is not 2-3 hundred years ago. The corporations are in control and they will step in BECAUSE THEY CAN and they already have the resources. Corporations are not altruistic, its not what they were invented for.

What the angle of yours on AC units ?
I have never touched one
Surely. You know there is a hell of a lot more to the fridge trade than a bit of air conditioning

Gary
06-07-2011, 10:25 PM
Do you want to tell me what would happen if we had no government? First thing would be every man for himself...and when enough people have been killed by the lawlessness a group of people will stand up and say we need to organize and elect a leader and.......on you go. But this is not 2-3 hundred years ago. The corporations are in control and they will step in BECAUSE THEY CAN and they already have the resources. Corporations are not altruistic, its not what they were invented for.

Are those the only two choices? All consuming totalitarian government or no government at all? I don't think so.

MikeHolm
06-07-2011, 11:00 PM
We (Americans for sure, and many other people as well) look at your Constitution as a good thing (by the people, for the people etc and the British one is good too) but the constitution never anticipated people so powerful and untouchable as the multi-billionare barons that hide behind a corporate name, the ruling class. Gary, who tells the government what to do?.................For small things the people do, sometimes.....but behind the scenes? It is not you and me.

Why do you blame government when their strings are being pulled by Mr. Big? Last I heard the candidate with the most bucks wins the race and you can't get in to see your senator but the head of Mr.Big Corp can. Why not blame them for the problems. I never hear a word about that. You think less regulation is better but I say GOOD regulation is necessary and no one should get a free ride.

On the subject of small AC units, when I was doing my electronics 30 years ago, we diagnosed down to component level, now it is down to board level only and that has, in some things, progressed to tossing the thing out and getting a new one. Life will progress and if we are still around in 20 years, who knows what we will see so I'm not worried about that.

MikeHolm
06-07-2011, 11:12 PM
What the angle of yours on AC units ?
I have never touched one
Surely. You know there is a hell of a lot more to the fridge trade than a bit of air conditioning

I actually don't believe in AC in general in houses, it is not one of mans basic needs, a desire defo, but not a need. When i look at all the city smog here in Toronto, much from coal power plants I am very glad that I don't contribute to by installing AC units. I'm into heat pumps partly because most of our power is from Nucs and Niagara Falls and thanks to a program that costs about a doughnut a year for everyone on their bill we have a really good feed in tariff for solar electricity.

Gary
06-07-2011, 11:31 PM
Why do you blame government when their strings are being pulled by Mr. Big? Last I heard the candidate with the most bucks wins the race and you can't get in to see your senator but the head of Mr.Big Corp can. Why not blame them for the problems. I never hear a word about that. You think less regulation is better but I say GOOD regulation is necessary and no one should get a free ride.



There are regulations that protect consumers from businesses... and then there are regulations that protect businesses from competition. The former are good regulations. The latter are bad regulations. They are the means by which Mr. Big got to be Mr. Big, because they stop all of the Mr. Littles from competing with him.

There are two ways to win a foot race. You can outrun the other guy or you can pay off the low life politicians to trip the other guy. The big corporations are running things because the politicians allow it. Politicians are the lowest form of life, the dregs of humanity.

MikeHolm
07-07-2011, 03:14 PM
The dregs of humanity are the ones who can be bought, you are right about that. Every man has his price, with very few exceptions so the rules should foresee this and there should be caps on election financing (which there are in Canada and Britain, here there are no donations allowed from Unions or Business) and individuals must declare it.

But for every transaction there has to be a buyer and a seller and you must tackle both of them politicians AND business. The basic system is pretty good but putting in judges that reverse what safeguards we have screws it up. Look at the changes made by Bush, senior and junior and by Reagan. They took away most legislation that puts the breaks on corruption. It is 10 times more corrupt than it was 30 years ago.

Greed is a big driving force and removing good laws will only be done if Mr. Big pushes for it.

Gary
07-07-2011, 08:06 PM
People will vote for the candidate who... a)promises to make somebody else pay for their favorite programs and/or... b)promises to control the behavior of others. IOW, they get elected BECAUSE they are thieves and dictators. Then the voters are shocked if/when they realize it is they who are getting screwed. That's what happens when you dance with the devil.

Quality
07-07-2011, 08:33 PM
I must presume that you do not vote then Gary ?

Gary
07-07-2011, 10:00 PM
I must presume that you do not vote then Gary ?

Then you presume incorrectly. Generally, I vote for people who have little chance of getting elected, but that's not what matters.

MikeHolm
07-07-2011, 10:32 PM
It is quite interesting that many people believe that a "conservative" candidate is looking out for their best interests, is more frugal and wants less government. That is very wrong. Under every conservative government in Canada, USA, Britain (with small exceptions) debt has gone up, earning power of the poor vs the rich has declined and there have been more limits placed on what individuals can do.

Case in point, many governments give some money to support the arts, in some way. With our new majority conservative government, funding has been cut to organizations whose message or programs (like live theater) doesn't meet their political dogma. Under "liberal" governments this would never have happened. Equal opportunity for all.

The same is true for battered womens shelters if the leadership says something out of line with the conservative dogma. Is this the right think to do?

Gary, I would like how you as an individual are getting screwed by the government. I have my own ideas but I would like to hear yours.

yinmorrison
08-07-2011, 09:26 PM
See what you started here Damaircon :eek:

Going back to your original point , I can tell you that I am fully qualified as well as the men, reason being_______ if they have to do it why shouldnt I. Apart from that I was on the tools originally, albeit some time ago now although I sometimes wish I had stayed there as well. Mind you I can still do an install now and again.
I have to tell you that I had an Electrical Wholesaler in the other day asking me about who I buy my refrigerant from!!! Why asks I , well it turns out a large refrigerant manufacturer wants to know if this Wholesaler, who has about 500 branches, would be willing to stock and sell refrigerant for them. I asked him how they were intending to regulate the sale of the refrigerant and he could not give me an adequate answer. I will be hearing the feedback from them soon but what does this tell us about regulation.

chillerman2006
07-08-2011, 12:54 AM
When the new F-gas certs were first announced I along with many others I know were rubbing our hands together and wrongly thinking - right that’s it - all the cowboys gone - mass shortage of engineers = massive wage rises :D

My delusion of an expected 20-30% wage increase over the next year or so was blown straight out the water as soon as I took my test and now totally confirmed by your posts here :(

I took the J11 as the test centre is just a short drive from my home and I am still now months later totally shocked at what I found

A trainer who did not understand principles of refrigeration and a mixed class of general building trades all of which needless to say passed with flying colours

It was a two day refresher with an additional half day for the theory/practical

Day one went well - rules, regs & protocols

Day two the trainer was exposed

He gave us some mock questions one of which was

If a system running on R134a has a discharge pressure of 12bar.g. and a liquid line temp of 52 degrees C what is the subcooling?

When it came to going through the questions the trainer pointed at me for this answer and I explained there was no subcooling and somehow his imaginary system had managed to superheat the refrigerant in the condenser.

He replied "wrong there is 3 degrees of subcooling" I tried to explain but he insisted he was right

I looked round at the others waiting for support and they all just looked blank and said nothing, so I just shook my head and let it go

The next day, test time it gets worse

This is the J11 so the trainer marks your paper - you must get 100% to pass - no online test

Taking my readings on the rig I found (R134a) there was a suction pressure of 1bar.g and temp was 17.2 degrees C - quickly working it out 1bar.g = minus 10 so I have a superheat of 27.2 degrees C, filled in my paper told him I was finished and asked if I could leave

He then pulled me to one side and said you want to change that one its 7.2 not 27.2 you have to just minus one from the other

We argued back and forth who was right until the point I had enough and told him he is talking out his backside:o

He then replied "you either put 7.2 or I am going to fail you"

Having no choice I put 7.2 and received a pass

This is just a joke £550 to be forced to write incorrect answers to pass a test which he nursed and basically guaranteed a pass to all the builders and now you guys have clearly shown me the ticket is just a political stunt to say “ hay we’re saving the planet”

To say I am not impressed is an understatement :mad:

tmm
07-08-2011, 08:16 AM
Comments surrounding the quality of training provisions aside have we all considered any of the following:
1) When CORGI was catapaulted in front of the public it was supported with a massive advertising campaign across all forms of media which highlighted the need for compliance. F-Gas has not been supported in a similar manner and relies, as far as I can see, upon the good will of the sector to self promote, on a un-paid basis, the requirement.
2) If the objective is to reduce CO2 why have we not enforced EPC/DEC/SAP's or Air Conditioning Inspections.
3) If the objective is to reduce refrigerant leakage why do we still have flares - I could go on!!
4) Whilst training obviously benefits both the larger community and the sector as a whole we retain the oldest housing stock in Europe, with all of the associate problems which this causes, and yet the focus of attention remains on this sector to reduce emissions?
5) Given that training improves the sector why do I still note that systems containing less refrigerant are exempt from F-Gas? The system capacity confirms the frequency of service visits - unless the criteria has changed since I completed 2078. We all have a responsibility under the Montreal Protocol to reduce leakage and although the Act was revised the opening paragraph of the revised legislation refers to this requirement.
6) The government has defined refrigerant and oil as hazardous waste so how is it possible for pre-charged units to be sold to associate trades - since by definition they will not have received the training to advise their client correctly. For example do you believe that DEFRA will accept that a unit which has remained unserviced for a period of years and than suffers a leak complies with the intent of the act and moreover if the customer has not been informed of their obligations under the act how could they avoid possible actions being brought by DEFRA?
7) I recently received notice from REFCOM that my membership had expired and that it should be upgraded to suit current legislation. The body of the letter continues that my inclusion on the 2078 data base will be used by the issuing authorities to confirm compliance with the new requirements rather than address those who have yet to obtain any training?

So if anybody can convince me that the new requirements are anything other than demonstrating compliance to Europe I welcome the confirmation.

tmm

chillerman2006
07-08-2011, 11:25 AM
5) Given that training improves the sector

The likes of Ellis training centre - Yes agreed - but the trainer i had is now doing 2 week new starter courses, getting total novices through a ticket, teaching them a load of bull:(

If you are trained incorrectly on superheat/subcooling what use is that to our industry ?

r.bartlett
07-08-2011, 09:12 PM
The likes of Ellis training centre - Yes agreed - but the trainer i had is now doing 2 week new starter courses, getting total novices through a ticket, teaching them a load of bull:(

If you are trained incorrectly on superheat/subcooling what use is that to our industry ?

We all know there are rogue trainers out there,we have covered this many times.

It would be a good idea to have a 5 yearly retest which will allow the regulators to slowly catch up on them and drive them out of business. However I hope you report this training company to DEFRA as unless we take action there is little point comong here moaning about poor standards.

chillerman2006
07-08-2011, 09:39 PM
However I hope you report this training company to DEFRA as unless we take action there is little point comong here moaning about poor standards.

I know deep down your 100% right here and shall give it some serious consideration over the next couple of days

taz24
09-08-2011, 01:29 PM
.

It is not DEFRA that need to know it is City & Guilds or CITB. CITB in this case.

If the course was run correctly you should have had a complaints procedure explained to you.

If he had failed you and if his calculations were as you say then that would be evidence and
the complaints procedure would highlight it.

If you felt you were not given a fair hearing then, you can take it up with the governing body
and they will assess the evidence and it will come to light.

If the evidence has gone it is now your word against his.

He will be told to check his information and as a training agency they will be told to improve standards
by carrying out internal quality audits. These will show up the problem if the training company are
realy bothered about standards and not just proffit.

We all make mistakes and we hopfuly learn from them but if a company is giving the qualification
away they are insulting your knowledge and hard work and are doing nobody any favours.

taz.

.

chillerman2006
09-08-2011, 02:49 PM
.


if a company is giving the qualification
away they are insulting your knowledge and hard work and are doing nobody any favours.

taz.

.

Exactly :(

If you take the citb/cskills or c&g route they have no one to answer to apart from there own investigating colleagues - easily brushed under the carpet

Where as when you take the F-Gas Support & Defra route, they both give you a reference number, do the complaining on your behalf and then ensure it is fully investigated and rectified

Defra's area of authority includes environmental laws are adhered to including false qualification which can have an environmental impact

in this case carbon footprint increase

If we all set up our systems with 27 degress of superheat instead of 7, unlike us they dont really care about the compressors life but they do about the excessive use of electricity

You and I , don't worry training bodies as we have no clout, Defra do

taz24
09-08-2011, 04:44 PM
Exactly :(

If you take the citb/cskills or c&g route they have no one to answer to apart from there own investigating colleagues - easily brushed under the carpet

Where as when you take the F-Gas Support & Defra route, they both give you a reference number, do the complaining on your behalf and then ensure it is fully investigated and rectified

Defra's area of authority includes environmental laws are adhered to including false qualification which can have an environmental impact

in this case carbon footprint increase

If we all set up our systems with 27 degress of superheat instead of 7, unlike us they dont really care about the compressors life but they do about the excessive use of electricity

You and I , don't worry training bodies as we have no clout, Defra do


Just for the record, I am a trainer and an assessor in a training centre.

I have always been open about this, trying to keep inpartial regarding differant
issues that are raised somtimes.

I'm not sure if you trust what I say, but

City & Guilds and CITB would come down very hard on anyone who is proven,
not to keep to standards.

If CITB got an email from an individual stating that they experienced somthing
that did not seem right they would and do look into it and it is done completely
indipendently from the trainers themselves.

Don't get me wrong, this system is not perfect and it can be improved but if
sombody felt there was an issue it needs to be raised so it could deal with it.

DEFRA would not know how to deal with this problem, nor are they empowered
to do anything. It is a quality of training issue and must be addressed by the training
agencies themselves.

taz

.

chillerman2006
09-08-2011, 05:02 PM
Just for the record, I am a trainer and an assessor in a training centre.
.

Yes I was aware and have wondered since if you may have trained me...along time ago i quickly add

Due to my recent experience of this trainer in question, I would never use a citb centre again

I would only go one place ETS now known as ETW, even though its well out of my way and would these days due to my location include over night stays

A dog only bites me once and then he's gone

RSTC
12-08-2011, 12:14 PM
It should be remembered that 2079 is not a PHD in RAC, but only an absolute minimum requirement for handling refrigerant containing F-gas in an environmentally safe manner (you can go ahead blow yourself up with propane or kill a small village with ammonia). In comparison to many other industries, it's the lightest of requirements.

In respect of the 'government with their hand in our pocket' comments, this is a European directive so everybody is in similar boats (the detail decided by member states), here there is no payment to the government - the training is even VAT exempt. I've said it here before, if you comply and you know somebody isn't - point the EPA in their direction (053) 91 60600 for Ireland and UK is posted by r.bartlett above. The standard instrument is now in law (SI278 see it here http://www.refrigerationskillnet.ie/pdfs/si279of2011.pdf) and the EPA have tendered and are appointing auditors for suppliers, contractors and end users of f-gases.

I know I'm preaching to the choir in this forum, but I am always amused by people (especially company bosses) who complain about 'other' trades presenting for training, who have not been investing in training themselves or their staff.

Oh and for 2079 there is no requirement to retrain or retest after a period and there is no provision in the Directive for it either. It is being revised but I don't believe there is any intention to change that. I understand that the CITB training is to be renewed periodically. As a matter of interest what is the industry view on the CITB v 2079... for example if you had two interview candidates one with 10 years experience and a CITB and one with 10 years experience and 2079 - which would you pick?

chillerman2006
12-08-2011, 03:44 PM
.

I know I'm preaching to the choir in this forum, but I am always amused by people (especially company bosses) who complain about 'other' trades presenting for training, who have not been investing in training themselves or their staff.

for example if you had two interview candidates one with 10 years experience and a CITB and one with 10 years experience and 2079 - which would you pick?

Hi RSTC

Jack of all trades & Master of None, :eek: - just my 2 cents on that one

The candidate to choose will be the most experienced/able, qualifications come second

R's chillerman :D

Grizzly
12-08-2011, 04:49 PM
It should be remembered that 2079 is not a PHD in RAC, but only an absolute minimum requirement for handling refrigerant containing F-gas in an environmentally safe manner (you can go ahead blow yourself up with propane or kill a small village with ammonia). In comparison to many other industries, it's the lightest of requirements.

In respect of the 'government with their hand in our pocket' comments, this is a European directive so everybody is in similar boats (the detail decided by member states), here there is no payment to the government - the training is even VAT exempt. I've said it here before, if you comply and you know somebody isn't - point the EPA in their direction (053) 91 60600 for Ireland and UK is posted by r.bartlett above. The standard instrument is now in law (SI278 see it here http://www.refrigerationskillnet.ie/pdfs/si279of2011.pdf) and the EPA have tendered and are appointing auditors for suppliers, contractors and end users of f-gases.

I know I'm preaching to the choir in this forum, but I am always amused by people (especially company bosses) who complain about 'other' trades presenting for training, who have not been investing in training themselves or their staff.

Oh and for 2079 there is no requirement to retrain or retest after a period and there is no provision in the Directive for it either. It is being revised but I don't believe there is any intention to change that. I understand that the CITB training is to be renewed periodically. As a matter of interest what is the industry view on the CITB v 2079... for example if you had two interview candidates one with 10 years experience and a CITB and one with 10 years experience and 2079 - which would you pick?

Hi RSTC.
Do you guys in ireland have the same cit& guilds / citb.
I ask because there is a huge difference between C&G Close book exam and CITB (Is it called J11 or something like that?) Which is open book.

Simply put the C&G is harder to obtain or at least should be.
Also why are you quoting Ammonia as it has nothing to do with these regs.
Safe handling of Ammonia is a totally separate course.
Basically holding an F Gas certificate is the industry starting point now!
We all have to have it so having one does not make the engineer.
What it does do however is make each and everyone of us in individually responsible.
Try arguing after something environmentally went wrong on one of your jobs, that you did not know better.
Ain't going to happen!

We all got driving licenses then we learned from experience.
F Gas is no different.
OH! I would employ the one with the experience that best suits the job role being offered.
Grizzly

Quality
12-08-2011, 04:52 PM
Yes I was aware and have wondered since if you may have trained me...along time ago i quickly add

Due to my recent experience of this trainer in question, I would never use a citb centre again

I would only go one place ETS now known as ETW, even though its well out of my way and would these days due to my location include over night stays

A dog only bites me once and then he's gone

I understand what you are saying about your center preference but the standard should be the same at every center and those who have been found to have a standard which is below the requirement should be brought to the attention of the certification body i.e. cskills of c&g

chillerman2006
12-08-2011, 05:18 PM
I understand what you are saying about your center preference but the standard should be the same at every center and those who have been found to have a standard which is below the requirement should be brought to the attention of the certification body i.e. cskills of c&g

Yep, fair comment bud

but citb J11 is 100% to pass & renewable every 5years

c&g 2079 is 70-75% (i am told) & is for life just like 2078 :D

That bit dont add up for starters, or does it

I have since found standards are the same at a place i often recommended untill I met someone they had trained and passed. The person I met spent just over half a day with me this week & now understands principles of ref. His actual words to me when I was getting ready to leave site was "I have learned more from you today than I did at that week long course"

I am not no trainer(just an engineer), but I do try to simplify things when explaining & I have good patience with trainee's that show interest. I also keep going over one thing till it sinks in & dont move on to another till we both sure they have got it.

Maybe I should be training the trainers my techniques, haha :rolleyes:

RSTC
12-08-2011, 06:32 PM
Hi Grizzly, Chillerman
I'm not actually employing! I'm just posing the question which (of the two) is seen as better from an employers standpoint (all other things being equal).

Re Irish qualifications, as it's a European directive any and all qualifications are acceptable over here so C&G is as accepted as say a german or polish qualification in the eyes of the EPA. FETAC is the Irish certification body, 5S0108 is the qualification code though I have yet to meet anybody who has done this as City & Guilds seems to be the training of choice.

RE my comment regarding ammonia etc I have spoken to a number of people who were under the impression that 2079 is in some way the top of the education pyramid, therefore miffed when they hear stories of non-time-served/experienced guys successfully completing it. Understandably they feel that their existing qualifications and experienced is undermined if (in people's minds) 2079 is all that matters....

my two cents is that F-Gas regs, especially the training element, is a big step forward for the industry and the environment and the people who pushed the matter like AREA, IoR, etc should commended for the work they have done (certainly not given out about) but now it's time to take a step back and remind the world that there is more to RAC than just handling F-Gas!

chillerman2006
12-08-2011, 07:38 PM
the training is even VAT exempt.

RSTC or TAZ .............. or Anyone else who knows

Can you confirm this for me ?

Point me in the direction of official site .... eg. .gov.uk

As I have been charged VAT

:confused:

polarpodge
13-08-2011, 03:03 PM
i encountered these same problems here in ireland there was electricians on my course who worked for air con companys they couldnt weld and barely use guages to pump down the simplest condensing units yet they still passed

Gary
13-08-2011, 04:35 PM
I think we would all agree that such courses teach people just enough to be dangerous. They are not a course in refrigeration, nor are they simply a material handling/transporting course. They teach too much and/or too little. They are neither here nor there. As such, they serve no useful purpose... and if anything are counter-productive.

Those who receive these certifications believe they are qualified to work on the systems. The problem isn't that they don't know, it's that they don't know that they don't know.

Quality
13-08-2011, 05:16 PM
just for the record the 2079 will not last forever as the 2078 did not nor the 2077. I have posted previously that the 2079 is based on BS EN 378 2000 which we all know has been replaced by BS EN 378 2008 hence the 2079 was already out of date when the city and guilds certified the first candidates back in 2008 when the new standard had been released.

My theory is to stick with construction skills which is very up to date

ps I do not work directly for either

chillerman2006
13-08-2011, 08:50 PM
i encountered these same problems here in ireland there was electricians on my course who worked for air con companys they couldnt weld and barely use guages to pump down the simplest condensing units yet they still passed

A problem not only in the EU & Ireland but also Australia & New Zealand see #12

http://www.refrigeration-engineer.com/forums/showthread.php?23118-Getting-ARCtick-license-in-Australia

I presume the world over


I think we would all agree that such courses teach people just enough to be dangerous. They are not a course in refrigeration, nor are they simply a material handling/transporting course. They teach too much and/or too little. They are neither here nor there. As such, they serve no useful purpose... and if anything are counter-productive.

Those who receive these certifications believe they are qualified to work on the systems. The problem isn't that they don't know, it's that they don't know that they don't know.

Here Here.. Quite right & Tactfully put


just for the record the 2079 will not last forever as the 2078 did not nor the 2077. I have posted previously that the 2079 is based on BS EN 378 2000 which we all know has been replaced by BS EN 378 2008 hence the 2079 was already out of date when the city and guilds certified the first candidates back in 2008

Well that is shocking - what a waste of time & how deceptive a new qualification can be

I think the only way forward is a world wide recongnised minimum qualification thats syllabus has been put together to cover all the basics of refrigeration + health & safety + environmental facts.

It needs to be derived from input from elected (by engineers) outspoken knowledgable individuals from all participating countries such as Gary that do not have a vested interest in making money from it like the current 2079 was.

A date should be set for compulsory qualification

And it should be made clear that if you dont have the knowledge for the theory or the skills & knowledge for the practicle you dont pass & you dont work in the industry untill you do.

There should be no hand holding on tests

And I for one would be happy to pay for training for myself, to bring me up to standard, if it was found I did not have the sufficient knowledge or skills to pass.

This would then in effect clean up the industry world wide & show the public what an Elite Industry this really should be & not the, any ole fool can do it, perception that I currently come across

Gary
14-08-2011, 12:40 AM
I'm not a big fan of elitism... especially when it is government mandated.

Personally, I would go the other way. Get rid of all of these useless regulations and go back to the original plan, i.e. phase out the suspect refrigerants at the manufacturing level and nothing else.

Stop screwing up our industry. The regulations cause more problems than they solve.

chillerman2006
14-08-2011, 01:07 AM
I'm not a big fan of elitism... especially when it is government mandated.

Stop screwing up our industry. The regulations cause more problems than they solve.

What's the way way forward then, to clean up the industry from a poor skills point of view, which all though it sounds selfish appears more important to most of us that have posted.

Thinking outside the box here for a minute, it's a bit

Pot Kettle Black

We are all multi-skilled (plumbers, electricians, refrigeration eng. & transport eng. diesel fitters aswell)

Gary
14-08-2011, 03:21 AM
The way to improve skills is to improve education... but then, we've been playing that game ever since I can remember. Every time there is a call for better education in our industry, what we end up getting is more education, not better education. More of what we don't need to know instead of what we do need to know.

It's like teaching someone how to swim. We teach him all about the chemical and physical properties of water and precisely how to build a swimming pool, then throw him in the deep end and wonder why he drowns. What can we expect when those who decide what constitutes "better education" are the people who design pools, rather than the expert swimmers?

chillerman2006
14-08-2011, 03:56 AM
The way to improve skills is to improve education... but then, we've been playing that game ever since I can remember. Every time there is a call for better education in our industry, what we end up getting is more education, not better education. More of what we don't need to know instead of what we do need to know.

It's like teaching someone how to swim. We teach him all about the chemical and physical properties of water and precisely how to build a swimming pool, then throw him in the deep end and wonder why he drowns. What can we expect when those who decide what constitutes "better education" are the people who design pools, rather than the expert swimmers?

It's late here now mate but I think I get what you mean

We need expert swimmers to pass on the skills, not so much pool attendents & without interference from politicians

It's just like the olympics though, larger countries have more expert swimmers to choose from & smaller ones have to just use what they do have & only occasionly gain medals when a gifted swimmer is found.

We still have a problem here then, people learning to swim & passing on there skills as they go, sadly not many of olympic standard

mad fridgie
14-08-2011, 04:15 AM
It would seem to me that most of this BS is driven by pilocks in govt departments, uni academics, training facilitors, manufactures and large end users, at the end of the day the contractors have to abide by the BS. If it is really seen as an issue, then regulate the industry properly, like the gas, electrical or petro chem industries (only those who are time served and fully qualified are allowed to undertake refrigeration/AC work) Refresher courses to keep up with changes in technology. (you will never stop those who will break the law regardless)

RSTC
14-08-2011, 09:28 PM
Point me in the direction of official site .... eg. .gov.uk

As I have been charged VAT

:confused:
extract from www.revenue.ie Appendix A: VAT Exempt activities :
"children's or young people's education, school or university education, and vocational training
or retraining (including the supply of goods and services incidental thereto , other than
the supply of research services), provided by educational establishments recognised by the
State, and education, training or retraining of a similar kind , excluding instruction in the driving
of mechanically propelled road vehicles other than vehicles designed or constructed for
the conveyance of goods with a capacity of 1.5 tonnes or more, provided by other persons;
"

That's for our side of the pond but I don't think you are any different. Hope that helps

chillerman2006
14-08-2011, 09:56 PM
extract from www.revenue.ie (http://www.revenue.ie) Appendix A: VAT Exempt activities :
"children's or young people's education, school or university education, and vocational training
or retraining (including the supply of goods and services incidental thereto , other than
the supply of research services), provided by educational establishments recognised by the
State, and education, training or retraining of a similar kind , excluding instruction in the driving
of mechanically propelled road vehicles other than vehicles designed or constructed for
the conveyance of goods with a capacity of 1.5 tonnes or more, provided by other persons;
"

That's for our side of the pond but I don't think you are any different. Hope that helps

Ok thanks mate, will phone and query my bill monday

cheers

chillerman2006
14-08-2011, 10:00 PM
It would seem to me that most of this BS is driven by pilocks in govt departments, uni academics, training facilitors, manufactures and large end users, at the end of the day the contractors have to abide by the BS. If it is really seen as an issue, then regulate the industry properly, like the gas, electrical or petro chem industries (only those who are time served and fully qualified are allowed to undertake refrigeration/AC work) Refresher courses to keep up with changes in technology. (you will never stop those who will break the law regardless)

Evening Mad

that would be perfect for us here & would be the way forward from an engineers point of view - the main thing we all know would happen is the less able would be removed from the industry untill they are able - and that would drive up wages - like it did when the gas trade was fully regulated

JohnFS
20-09-2011, 02:12 PM
Some say that politicians etc are bad yes often that's true, but without rules how does society operate? Someone has to set the rules. Or is it suggested it's everyman for him self (see Somalia, pirates, terrorists etc)?
Then there are those that deny global warming, well the vast majority of world scientific community can't be wrong! But then there are some who see conspiracy every where and even when confronted with evidence disproving their theories they invent more rubbish!
With regard to re-training, would you like a surgeon to operate on you who last had up to date training say in 1970 when they qualified? Or would you prefer a surgeon who used up to date practice & technology as so saving you're life!
All trade industries need to be governed by a registration system same as doctors and therefore to practice unregistered would be a criminal offence. This in the long run makes life easier for all. The customer would be confident that he will pay only once for a job. Not hire a cowboy who screws the job, then the customer pays twice to get a qualified person to correct the bad job! This would raise the pay for all after all if the customer knows he will only pay once he will be prepared to pay a reasonable price. Otherwise the qualified are under cut by the cowboys then the qualified are knocked down on price because the customer has run out of money!

Gary
20-09-2011, 03:44 PM
Once again we hear the all or nothing crap. We need minimum laws, not zero laws and not laws that dictate how you must walk, talk, look, act and think, every waking moment of your life.

The vast majority of the scientific community can't be wrong? Aren't these the same crowd who said tomatoes were poisonous? They are often wrong... and these days they are funded/controlled by politicians.

Some of the worst jobs I have seen were done by licensed people... and some of the best by unlicensed people. It doesn't mean a thing.

chillerman2006
20-09-2011, 09:58 PM
Once again we hear the all or nothing crap. We need minimum laws, not zero laws and not laws that dictate how you must walk, talk, look, act and think, every waking moment of your life.

.

Too Right Mate

you have a perfect way of summing up Gary

Cheers chillerman

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 12:22 AM
Once again we hear the all or nothing crap. We need minimum laws, not zero laws and not laws that dictate how you must walk, talk, look, act and think, every waking moment of your life.

The vast majority of the scientific community can't be wrong? Aren't these the same crowd who said tomatoes were poisonous? They are often wrong... and these days they are funded/controlled by politicians.

Some of the worst jobs I have seen were done by licensed people... and some of the best by unlicensed people. It doesn't mean a thing.

Gary , the vast number of scientists who work on global warming are at universities, which by the way, are supposed to be areas where one can undertake study in almost anything and discuss almost anything without interference from governments or corporations. This is the very basis of the University and has been for centuries. Unfortunately the world IS moving towards a corporate agenda whether we like it or not (govt is more and more controlled by them), and funding is coming more and more from corporate sources. This is a fact in North America although less so in Europe.

In the medical world, where my wife is a scientist, the govt says "we have to reduce arthritis". You scientists present grants for possible avenues to explore and a body of your peers will decide (not the government, mind you) if they have merit. Then you get the funds.

The scientists (and I know a few) couldn't care less about a govt agenda. They are from all areas of study and some of them just wonder why all the frogs are disappearing, for example. They just want to find out why something is happening and if it points left, they go left. If it point right they turn right.

The climate conferences put out their report and that report is a consensus report so if 5% of the scientists don't agree, it doesn't go in the report. In this way, what you read is the very base of agreement. Nothing pie in the sky.....nothing overblown.

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 12:27 AM
With the massive changes going on around us, post 911, expect more intrusion, not less into our lives. I am a bit libertarian as well which is why I couldn't live in Europe, I think, but i do understand the flawed way we create the laws, many of which I hate as much as you guys do.

mikeref
21-09-2011, 12:45 AM
Might be o.k for your area Mike. Different points of view down here. Not me but the way the powers to be tend to go with what they want, not with something that is factual. If it doesn't bring in the money, they turn the other way. Happening now, so much evidence has been provided, for and against such subjects as global warming/ carbon pollution. Medical leans to where the money is, not what can cure someone for a few dollars. Imagine how the drug companies would go broke, with many people out of jobs if there was a cure for anything. (Taking forever to develop cure for the big C when many out there know ways around it). Sorry for rant and have to stop here before i get wound up about the "C"..Mike.

Gary
21-09-2011, 01:20 AM
Been a while since I was at university, but I remember it being very political. All the professors leaned so far left it's a wonder the building didn't tip over.

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 11:56 AM
The current govt in Canada is dominated with people whos profs (at U of Chicago and U of Calgary) leaned so far to the right that Hitler almost comes into view. You may be right about a lot of universities generally leaning to the left but one thing I noticed is that the left will put on a debate and invite the right to speak but the right seldom does the same for the left.

A funny thing I noticed years ago. A local paper in Toronto took all the 44 elected city councilors, looked at their lawns and gardens and added their political leanings to the picture. The upshot is that the more conservative councilors had very perfect, controlled lawns where nothing was out of place and the lefties may have had designed landscaping but then left nature to take its course. The point that was made was that the lefties wanted people to be able to do their own thing, whatever that was (as long as they were not breaking laws) and the right needed everything under its control, a bit opposite to the general perception.

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 12:12 PM
Might be o.k for your area Mike. Different points of view down here. Not me but the way the powers to be tend to go with what they want, not with something that is factual. If it doesn't bring in the money, they turn the other way. Happening now, so much evidence has been provided, for and against such subjects as global warming/ carbon pollution. Medical leans to where the money is, not what can cure someone for a few dollars. Imagine how the drug companies would go broke, with many people out of jobs if there was a cure for anything. (Taking forever to develop cure for the big C when many out there know ways around it). Sorry for rant and have to stop here before i get wound up about the "C"..Mike.

Mike, I've had the big "C" and it's not pretty. Father in law and sister in law going through it at the mo. I agree with you that corporate medical goes where the money is. In Canada, where the provincial govt is responsible for supplying money to the hospitals, they see health cost taking up 40%+ of all tax dollars and have to try and balance health delivery and finding ways to reduce the rising costs.

The simple fact is that most ailments are on the increase especially ones where environmental factors such as manufactured foods or pesticides and hormones may be at play. How do you stop all these things without research and banning things from the food chain. Corporate food guys will scream blood murder and their goes our freedom but when most people couldn't care what they eat as long as their tummies are full, where do you stop? It is a big question.

There is a big argument here about the pink ribbon campaign for breast cancer and the proceeds going towards chemo and not towards research to get rid of the problem....only benefits the drug companies, as usual.

Gary
21-09-2011, 01:35 PM
The left would force you to live this way and the right would force you to live that way. They differ only in the brand of dictatorship they are peddling. When the boot is on your neck, it doesn't matter if it's left or right.

Gary
21-09-2011, 01:42 PM
The point that was made was that the lefties wanted people to be able to do their own thing, whatever that was (as long as they were not breaking laws)...

Therein lies the rub. If everything is dictated by law, then people are NOT able to do their own thing.

Everyone gives lip service to freedom... then they pass law after law... after law... after law... after law...

I would want people to be able to dp their own thing, whatever that is (as long as they are not harming others). See the difference?

chillerman2006
21-09-2011, 06:37 PM
Evening Gary

'laws were made to be broken' or we would not have them anyway, would not be needed

also agree with your second comment (as long as they are not harming others).

physical/mental harm can not be tolerated but those claiming harm from trivia, should not be tolerated either

R's chillerman :)

Gary
21-09-2011, 08:01 PM
Harm to others should be the dividing line between that which is legal and that which is not.

There are actions which are clearly harmful to others and these should be felonies.

Then there is the grey area where harm to others is debatable and these should be at most misdemeanors.

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 08:15 PM
Harm to others should be the dividing line between that which is legal and that which is not.

There are actions which are clearly harmful to others and these should be felonies.

Then there is the grey area where harm to others is debatable and these should be at most misdemeanors.


OK, not so hypothetical question....if McDonalds makes "food" with little nutrition and a lot of fat and sugar, markets it really well (as they do), and therefore are a partial cause in the increase in diabetes and other diseases, does this constitute harm to a perhaps not so bright person (who may otherwise be an upstanding member of the community)? If it does, what is the solution? It's that fine line between a corporations "right" to make money and the publics "right" to be protected. We can't be expected to be educated in everything we eat or do. Do we?

chillerman2006
21-09-2011, 08:27 PM
It's hard I find to judge what exactly is that borderline between what should/shouldn't be law

have been thinking about it since your post & I cant stand here & say this should this shouldn't be

apart from the obvious that are definately wrong....we both agree I think, we don't want lawless

but what exactly should be law I really cant say, as some things affect others in different ways

I think its really hard to nail this one, as there will always be another view on what we agree by others & I suppose thats why we are having this conversation, as others have agreed with what is law now, but we dissagree :confused:

What is a 'felony' mate ???

R's chillerman

chillerman2006
21-09-2011, 08:33 PM
OK, not so hypothetical question....if McDonalds makes "food" with little nutrition and a lot of fat and sugar, markets it really well (as they do), and therefore are a partial cause in the increase in diabetes and other diseases, does this constitute harm to a perhaps not so bright person (who may otherwise be an upstanding member of the community)? If it does, what is the solution? It's that fine line between a corporations "right" to make money and the publics "right" to be protected. We can't be expected to be educated in everything we eat or do. Do we?

I would say (personally) that should be governed by a health law

If you are going to market anything it should be farely truthfull & unhealthy food should be clearly labelled as unhealthy, that would be right to protect all & give them a chance to decide, do I put 5 bullets in this gun for russian roulette or only one, as most foods not good for you now ! Or so they say (especially my full english breakfast I have nearly every day) Where as when I was a wee laddie bread & dripping was supposed to be a treat, that made you grow big and strong !

R's chillerman

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 09:10 PM
The biggest point here is that there are two ways to look at a problem like this......one is to say "ban it as it shows some evidence of hurting people" or the opposite which is not to ban it until it is proven to hurt people. Most corporations like the second one so they can sell smokes to minors knowing that the time it takes to actually prove something is a long time and takes a lot of money (and screws up the health system).

BTW, what caused my cancer when I was 35, according to the pathology report, was the fire retardant put into McDonalds deep fat frying oil that went into my hash brown potato every morning for 5 years. Apparently it is a carcinogen. haven't had one since

Gary
21-09-2011, 09:44 PM
What is a 'felony' mate ???


A felony is a major offense, generally resulting in prison time.

A misdemeanor is a minor offense, generally resulting in a fine.

chillerman2006
21-09-2011, 09:50 PM
The biggest point here is that there are two ways to look at a problem like this......one is to say "ban it as it shows some evidence of hurting people" or the opposite which is not to ban it until it is proven to hurt people. Most corporations like the second one so they can sell smokes to minors knowing that the time it takes to actually prove something is a long time and takes a lot of money (and screws up the health system).

BTW, what caused my cancer when I was 35, according to the pathology report, was the fire retardant put into McDonalds deep fat frying oil that went into my hash brown potato every morning for 5 years. Apparently it is a carcinogen. haven't had one since

I still think you can not ban something - we all need the right to choose - I smoke yet I know odds are stacked against me living to old age, breathing perfect, many smokers last breaths are not good and thats if your lungs dont succomb to the big 'C'

Your second bit mate, Sorry to here that Mike, that really is wrong, very wrong...cant imagine what you been through, especially knowing they caused it, have had minor, just skin and that was worrying enough at the time, it does not matter how level headed you are, thats a hard thing to hear...Do hope you totally clear now mate

As pathology was conclusive hope they had to pay you plenty too (even though money is never enough)

R's chillerman

ps: your still looking young mate ;)

chillerman2006
21-09-2011, 09:51 PM
A felony is a major offense, generally resulting in prison time.

A misdemeanor is a minor offense, generally resulting in a fine.

Thanks mate

we often have american programmes on and never new difference

cheers

R's chillerman

Gary
21-09-2011, 10:01 PM
The biggest point here is that there are two ways to look at a problem like this......one is to say "ban it as it shows some evidence of hurting people" or the opposite which is not to ban it until it is proven to hurt people. Most corporations like the second one so they can sell smokes to minors knowing that the time it takes to actually prove something is a long time and takes a lot of money (and screws up the health system).

BTW, what caused my cancer when I was 35, according to the pathology report, was the fire retardant put into McDonalds deep fat frying oil that went into my hash brown potato every morning for 5 years. Apparently it is a carcinogen. haven't had one since


If a product is obviously dangerous to your health or labelled as such, and you purchase it anyway, the government should have no say in the matter. It is a voluntary transaction. You have chosen to take your chances.

BTW, you should sue McDonalds.

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:03 PM
I still think you can not ban something - we all need the right to choose - I smoke yet I know odds are stacked against me living to old age, breathing perfect, many smokers last breaths are not good and thats if your lungs dont succomb to the big 'C'

Your second bit mate, Sorry to here that Mike, that really is wrong, very wrong...cant imagine what you been through, especially knowing they caused it, have had minor, just skin and that was worrying enough at the time, it does not matter how level headed you are, thats a hard thing to hear...Do hope you totally clear now mate

As pathology was conclusive hope they had to pay you plenty too (even though money is never enough)

R's chillerman

ps: your still looking young mate ;)



Should the seatbelt law be repelled?

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:07 PM
If a product is obviously dangerous to your health or labelled as such, and you purchase it anyway, the government should have no say in the matter. It is a voluntary transaction. You have chosen to take your chances.

BTW, you should sue McDonalds.

Should there be a law to test and declare these products

Gary
21-09-2011, 10:09 PM
Should the seatbelt law be repelled?

Yes... it is none of the government's business.

Gary
21-09-2011, 10:11 PM
Should there be a law to test and declare these products

No... if they prove to be harmful, sue the manufacturer... if they label it and you use it anyway, you lose the lawsuit.

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:15 PM
Yes... it is none of the government's business.

Should I have to pay to have the road wiped down after someone went through the windshield?

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:17 PM
No... if they prove to be harmful, sue the manufacturer... if they label it and you use it anyway, you lose the lawsuit.

what if you die before you get a chance to sue

Gary
21-09-2011, 10:18 PM
Should I have to pay to have the road wiped down after someone went through the windshield?

Yes... you personally should be required to bear all cleanup costs.

A ridiculous question merits a ridiculous answer.

Gary
21-09-2011, 10:23 PM
what if you die before you get a chance to sue

Then your family can sue.

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:31 PM
Yes... you personally should be required to bear all cleanup costs.

Your logic ran out of road very quickly....Sadly for all some of us who have hippie backgrounds life gets in the way. To live a true Communist way would be utopia. Sadly as history shows: human frailties committed that experiment to the dustbin of failed ideologies. Your dream of a lawless yet lawful society is yet another ideal doomed to failure.

In certain societies your ideals worked. Native Indians being an obvious one. However they had plenty yet lived a simple life. Those days are long gone and society has become what it is and we are well past the point of no return.. Still the world loves a daydream believer as they used to sing

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:32 PM
Then your family can sue.

and if I have no family or they cannot afford to sue?

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 10:38 PM
Yes... you personally should be required to bear all cleanup costs.

A ridiculous question merits a ridiculous answer.

Who do you think pays to clear up the mess then?

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 10:39 PM
Then your family can sue.

And what if your family or yourself cannot afford to sue, or for that matter you are able to sue but Mr BIG can afford the nations top lawyers? Americans I believe sue more than anyone else by a wide margin, yet it does not seem to make things safer in the USA nor does it seem to stop people from taking advantage of others. It is not the solution to everything.

And the time is long past for me to sue McDonalds. I decided it was not worth the emotional energy and bad karma.

Laws help to bridge the divide between rich and poor and so does mediation (when it is available)

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 10:40 PM
Your logic ran out of road very quickly....Sadly for all some of us who have hippie backgrounds life gets in the way. To live a true Communist way would be utopia. Sadly as history shows: human frailties committed that experiment to the dustbin of failed ideologies. Your dream of a lawless yet lawful society is yet another ideal doomed to failure.

In certain societies your ideals worked. Native Indians being an obvious one. However they had plenty yet lived a simple life. Those days are long gone and society has become what it is and we are well past the point of no return.. Still the world loves a daydream believer as they used to sing

Well said Master Bartlett...

Gary
21-09-2011, 10:51 PM
Your logic ran out of road very quickly....Sadly for all some of us who have hippie backgrounds life gets in the way. To live a true Communist way would be utopia. Sadly as history shows: human frailties committed that experiment to the dustbin of failed ideologies. Your dream of a lawless yet lawful society is yet another ideal doomed to failure.

In certain societies your ideals worked. Native Indians being an obvious one. However they had plenty yet lived a simple life. Those days are long gone and society has become what it is and we are well past the point of no return.. Still the world loves a daydream believer as they used to sing

Communist?... just another form of dictatorship.

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 11:04 PM
Communist?... just another form of dictatorship.

You obviously don't know what Communism actually is: rather how it has been (mis)intrepreted..

Communist idealogy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Communism is a sociopolitical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociopolitical) movement that aims for a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)classless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classless_society) and (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)stateless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_society) society (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society) structured (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_and_superstructure) upon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)common ownership (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ownership) of the (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)means of production (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Means_of_production), free access to articles of consumption, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)and the end of wage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_labour)labour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_labour) and (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)private (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property)property (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property)
in the means of production and real estate. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism)

Gary
21-09-2011, 11:13 PM
You obviously don't know what Communism actually is: rather how it has been (mis)intrepreted..

Communist idealogy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

And you obviously have not read my posts... or perhaps you were referring to yourself as a communist?

MikeHolm
21-09-2011, 11:13 PM
Communist/ Fascist, nearly the the same thing and we are not quite there yet but America is slowly moving towards Fascist or theocratic-fascist rule as I see it.

If you took all the Europeans out of Europe and replaced them with a half Billion Americans with their current ideologies(left and right), there would be war within a couple of years. There is a reason why the political climate in most American cities is more left wing than in the suburbs......people need each other and to get along in density, you need to compromise. Not in Texas or anywhere else where there is room for people to get away from everyone else but when you cannot get away, you must learn to live with people and that means laws.

Britons have the right to common passage across privately owned tracts of land for a reason...
They prevent people from building on every single piece of property (unlike over here) for a reason....

a million other laws that are for the common good and keep some harmony....

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 11:33 PM
And you obviously have not read my posts... or perhaps you were referring to yourself as a communist?


I did, as you stated communism was a form of dictatorship -which it plainly isn't. (Not if you truely understand what communism is,which by your own admission you don't)

We all should be communists> "For the people by the people" is communism in it's purest form... How ironic is that?

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 11:39 PM
Communist/ Fascist, nearly the the same thing and we are not quite there yet but America is slowly moving towards Fascist or theocratic-fascist rule as I see it.

If you took all the Europeans out of Europe and replaced them with a half Billion Americans with their current ideologies(left and right), there would be war within a couple of years. There is a reason why the political climate in most American cities is more left wing than in the suburbs......people need each other and to get along in density, you need to compromise. Not in Texas or anywhere else where there is room for people to get away from everyone else but when you cannot get away, you must learn to live with people and that means laws.

Britons have the right to common passage across privately owned tracts of land for a reason...
They prevent people from building on every single piece of property (unlike over here) for a reason....

a million other laws that are for the common good and keep some harmony....

There has never been a true communist country so I don't believe you can make the connection. If you said Socialist/Fascists were close then I'd agree. For example Hitler was a left wing socialist who was called a right wing fascist

Gary
21-09-2011, 11:45 PM
I admitted no such thing... and communism calls for the majority to dictate the lives of the minority.

r.bartlett
21-09-2011, 11:49 PM
I admitted no such thing... and communism calls for the majority to dictate the lives of the minority.

Communist?... just another form of dictatorship.

Err yes you did..Unless you don't understand what a dictatorship is either?

Gary
21-09-2011, 11:56 PM
Err yes you did..Unless you don't understand what a dictatorship is either?

I use a much broader definition of dictatorship.

MikeHolm
22-09-2011, 12:10 AM
There has never been a true communist country so I don't believe you can make the connection. If you said Socialist/Fascists were close then I'd agree. For example Hitler was a left wing socialist who was called a right wing fascist

Very true but I was referring less to the theoretical definition of Communism than that of the "state capitalist" country of the the USSR and their brand of communism. Also, where in the USSR, everything was state owned, Nazi's made pacts with the large industrialists and didn't nationalize industries under their own name (although they were controlled by the state to some extent for the upcoming war).

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 05:38 PM
Gents

1. you's blow me away with your vast knowledge & in depth detail of this confusing (to me) subject

2. you are all good friends of mine....please please keep it cool...I am very interested in your views here, very educational to me, but sad to see friends of mine getting so heated, we all have different views & none of us can agree with everyone all the time, but it does not mean , anyone is wrong or right.....hope you's can all shake hands tonight & continue to educate me (& others) without the heat

Thanx in advance

R's chillerman :)

Gary
22-09-2011, 06:35 PM
Those who advocate controversial (grey area) laws naively believe those laws will be obeyed and everyone will live happily ever after. Sorry, that's not how it works.

The more controversial the law, the more likely it will be disobeyed.

You can put a gun to someone's head and force them to obey you, but when your back is turned they will disobey you... and if they think they can get away with it they will strangle you in your sleep.

Whenever one person/group is able to dominate another person/group it is personal and heated... especially for those on the losing end who must choose between slavery or punishment.

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 06:53 PM
The thing that confuses me with communism is 'if' its for the good of everyone to be all equal with no higher/lower classes, everyone is treated the same

Then why do the two countries that first come to mind R & C ...have such appalling records of human rights ???

Why do they execute (murder) their own ??? ( is this right ??? does anyone have the right to take life ??? ) & one I have seen recently even makes the other prisoners carry this out

Rather than allow everyone to be equal, it appears to me that they have even more laws, with far harsher punishments and the harshest of all if your dare speak out against the regime that run the country

R's chillerman

Gary
22-09-2011, 07:02 PM
The grey area laws are the most difficult to enforce, leading their advocates to call for increasingly harsher punishments... until they end up murdering their own.

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 07:05 PM
By which are you referring to (grey area laws) laws that say you are not aloud to object to who & how the country is run ???

Or am I getting lost here again mate ?

Gary
22-09-2011, 07:15 PM
The grey area laws are those laws where the offending action is not clearly harmful to others.

Virtually everyone would agree that such things as murder, rape and robbery should be illegal.

Such things as speaking out against the powers-that-be (or for that matter not wearing a seat belt) are not as clearly wrong and many would view such laws as unjust.

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 07:27 PM
Ok with you now

What about execution Gary, I think thats still active in your state ???

Whats your views there, is this justified ??? Do you think we should not ???

I dont get it & if I walk at night in the dark & tread on a snail/slug or anything else, I am not happy & feel I need to take better care where I walk, life is life to me & feel lucky to be part of the dominating creatures, and know could just as easily been born as something else & it could be me being trodden on

Gary
22-09-2011, 07:41 PM
It would depend upon the extreme severity of the crime and how absolutely certain I am that they are guilty. After they are executed, you can't say, "Oops, wrong guy" and release them. That said, some people are clearly a waste of skin.

Gary
22-09-2011, 07:46 PM
As to other creatures, the moral compact (I don't harm you and you don't harm me) only applies to humans.

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 08:32 PM
It would depend upon the extreme severity of the crime and how absolutely certain I am that they are guilty. After they are executed, you can't say, "Oops, wrong guy" and release them. That said, some people are clearly a waste of skin.

I dont know, mate if I agree totally - for instance I watched the iraq leader hang, even though I do not agree with anything he did, I did not think it was right what happened & if I had the choice would have preferred to see him jailed for life, but then again looking at it from the other side, the people he had hurt then I think I would have been ok with it....& then when I think of the organisers behind the two towers, they should not be given mercy, So yeah the more I think about it I do agree, as long as it is certain they carried out the extremity


As to other creatures, the moral compact (I don't harm you and you don't harm me) only applies to humans.

Thats another hard one for me as not harming others does not make certain they will not harm you...dogs come first in my world, they if brought up properly have the best morals, bitches more so than dogs, they will give you continued love & loylety and all they ask in return is food & exercise, a good bitch will defend you to the death, where as a dog will until they get flared and then they will flight...over the years I have taken two dogs off ex friends and decked a stranger in the street for kicking his dog, all animals even those I dont like get respect and I would not hurt any of them intentially, where as some humans like the one kicking his dog, ask for it, so maybe I have some double standards there, when I look back at the other quote and my response, but hey we would not be human if we were perfect

R's chillerman

ps: my pups attached7835

Quality
22-09-2011, 08:41 PM
its all about opinion I agree with the dogs as they are as you say but older folk do not like others opinion if its different from their own we all will end up with a similar opinion

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 09:22 PM
its all about opinion I agree with the dogs as they are as you say but older folk do not like others opinion if its different from their own we will end up with a similar opinion

Hi Quality

Dogs I can yak on all night about, so I best not

I hear what you say about our elders, currently siting in the midle bracket here I try to keep up with the future (the younger Gen.) & try to see it from the past (the older Gen) I like the future as its always evolving as each generation goes by & I try to learn from the past.. The bit that makes me more past than future is change... many area's I like change especially technology/gadgets but I have noticed I really dont like change to what is the norm to me, the way I live my life in general, the natural me & most of all work, thats so hard to accept change, I am so set in my ways already that even though I dont agree with many recent events...I can see why some dont like that change... its just something we all need to get used to though... as its a cold hard fact of life, the younger generation are taking over all the time and with that comes change ! And without them and change we dont have a future

R's chillerman

Gary
22-09-2011, 09:44 PM
Winning the lottery is change.

A sharp stick in the eye is change.

As you get older, you've gotten the sharp stick in the eye from those who promise change so many times that you start questioning whether it's change for the better or change for the worse.

It's not enough to say people (older or otherwise) resist change. Exactly what change are we talking about?

monkey spanners
22-09-2011, 09:51 PM
I have a lot of time for animals, i sponsor an animal sanctuary and have a couple of rescue dogs and a half share in a pony! I find it easy to be compassionate for animals as even if they have harmed me i don' think they have the, inteligence is not the right word as they are as bright as they need to be, maybe ego is a better description, they don't have an ego that leads to the harm. No dog would bite you because it thought you disrespected it for example.
I am working on having more compassion and understanding for my fellow humans as even when they harm me, even when its ego led, its also due to causes and conditions, in other circumstances we could have been friends, no person is inherantly bad (excepting people who have serious mental conditions and such and even here there are causes and conditions).

I have respect for all forms of life, yesterday i got an odd look from a customer as i rescued a beetle that was walking about where it would likely get squished.

Who knows i may well be a beetle next time round if i'm lucky enough :p

Jon :)

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 10:06 PM
I have a lot of time for animals, i sponsor an animal sanctuary and have a couple of rescue dogs :p

Jon :)

Just a quickie and will come back to other posts tomorrow as now - bed/up early :(

Top Man Jon....Respect :)

R's chillerman

mad fridgie
22-09-2011, 10:09 PM
there are a many great ideas, that are ideals, but most just do not work in practice, because our human nature causes to strive for change. We attempt to evolve to make what we think is a better life.
What is right or wrong is only a perception in time and location.

chillerman2006
22-09-2011, 10:13 PM
Winning the lottery is change.

A sharp stick in the eye is change.

As you get older, you've gotten the sharp stick in the eye from those who promise change so many times that you start questioning whether it's change for the better or change for the worse.

It's not enough to say people (older or otherwise) resist change. Exactly what change are we talking about?

Then again, always got time for Gary

change - forum/fridge controllers analogue to digital/price of a pint/weather/waist size/seat belt law revoked/cheap ciggies in florida & milton keynes/end of world famine...practically anything mate...all change will make some happier than others and changes come a knocking wether we like them or not...and I have found most are not welcome to me

R's chillerman

Gary
23-09-2011, 06:41 AM
Really? I have no problem with most changes.

So... you must be older than me, right?

taz24
23-09-2011, 09:05 AM
Really? I have no problem with most changes.

So... you must be older than me, right?

Is it possible to be older than you Gary :)

Of all the people I know and of all the people I think I know
you would be top of my list to sit down over a nice meal and have
a real good talk.

Your views and beliefs may differ from mine at times but you have a morral
conviction and a sense of right and wrong that I completely, 100% agree with.

I just don't always come up with the same conclusions as you :) but is that not what
makes life great.

We might not be totaly free to post everything on this site for obvious reasons
but we can have an exchange of oppinions.

All the best
mate taz.

Oh and Ps, regarding the death penalty I'm for it and against it.

I would not be prepard to actualy kill sombody in cold blood.so how could I ask sombody to do that for me.....


taz

.

TRASH101
23-09-2011, 09:08 AM
there are a many great ideas, that are ideals, but most just do not work in practice, because our human nature causes to strive for change. We attempt to evolve to make what we think is a better life.
What is right or wrong is only a perception in time and location.

Well put Mad,

If I may make one addition to the "right and wrong" with convention.

I hope you all know that this sort of discussion may tempt providence. (in this case providence = Mr. O'Brien)

:)

MikeHolm
23-09-2011, 11:43 AM
Gary, the problem with humans is our absolute hubris and arrogance. It is a fact that as individuals, can come up with amazing ideas, philosophical and technical, but as a group we, like most animals, have a herd mentality and lack wisdom to see the effects of our actions. (Example...People say advertising doesn't affect them so why is there an industry...we are easily duped (yes, I really need that Caddy Escalade to move my one kid to school))

The idea that we can separate ourselves from the rest of the world we live in, make all sorts of changes to it (which we do, often without concern or awareness) and expect that at the end of the day, the steak and beer we enjoy now, we will be able to enjoy 20 years down the road is ludicrous.

There is too many of us, 80% of fish in the see are gone (to the point now that some fisherman are selling lesser species as more desirable ones because the good ones are not there any more), Almost every disease is on the rise. And we don't think we have an effect????????

We NEED to respect other animals and we need to realize we are not omnipotent....we need wisdom and it is in short supply.....and....we need to stop idolizing our idiology

Emmett
23-09-2011, 02:12 PM
There is too many of us, 80% of fish in the see are gone (to the point now that some fisherman are selling lesser species as more desirable ones because the good ones are not there any more), Almost every disease is on the rise. And we don't think we have an effect????????

Mike,
What makes you so certain that "WE" are the cause?

Gary
23-09-2011, 03:33 PM
Gary, the problem with humans is our absolute hubris and arrogance. It is a fact that as individuals, can come up with amazing ideas, philosophical and technical, but as a group we, like most animals, have a herd mentality and lack wisdom to see the effects of our actions. (Example...People say advertising doesn't affect them so why is there an industry...we are easily duped (yes, I really need that Caddy Escalade to move my one kid to school))

The idea that we can separate ourselves from the rest of the world we live in, make all sorts of changes to it (which we do, often without concern or awareness) and expect that at the end of the day, the steak and beer we enjoy now, we will be able to enjoy 20 years down the road is ludicrous.

There is too many of us, 80% of fish in the see are gone (to the point now that some fisherman are selling lesser species as more desirable ones because the good ones are not there any more), Almost every disease is on the rise. And we don't think we have an effect????????


Who said we didn't have any effect? Everything affects everything else.

Laws are not the answer. Persuasion begets allies, coercion begets enemies.

Gary
23-09-2011, 03:51 PM
... 80% of fish in the see are gone (to the point now that some fisherman are selling lesser species as more desirable ones because the good ones are not there any more)...

It kinda worked itself out, didn't it?

MikeHolm
23-09-2011, 05:10 PM
There is too many of us, 80% of fish in the see are gone (to the point now that some fisherman are selling lesser species as more desirable ones because the good ones are not there any more), Almost every disease is on the rise. And we don't think we have an effect????????

Mike,
What makes you so certain that "WE" are the cause?

That is pretty simple. I assume that you are saying that climate change happens anyway. Yes it does, but never as fast as in the last century. Not even close. As I said above somewhere, the scientists make these conclusions by consensus therefore the reports must be middle of the road as you will always find someone who will believe things happen faster or slower. These scientists are from all disciplines, all countries with all ideologies and there is 10,000 or more of them.

These people ARE the experts in their fields, why, if they put through thoroughly vetted reports, should we not believe them.....the only reason I can think of is that we just don't want to. Either because it is too hard for our fragile egos to accept that we capable of it or because it is not in our current financial interest to accept it (maybe we just pine for the good old days).

Every report in the last 20 years stated the earth temp and co2 would rise by X amount and every subsequent one has said "oh I am sorry, it seems we were a bit low on the last prediction, it's rising more". And if there s dis agreement, it not about the basic understanding of climate change, it's about how much or how little the projections will be.

So, yes I am certain that we are the cause. Remember, we are the ones who make tools, we are the ones who mine mineral, burn oil and make dams in China that cause local major seismic activity. Not the apes or the whales. We are also the only species who is capable of wiping out whole other species within a few years and we breed like rabbits, no.

MikeHolm
23-09-2011, 05:23 PM
It kinda worked itself out, didn't it?

Yes, but not the way I hoped it would.

Emmett
23-09-2011, 06:03 PM
That is pretty simple. I assume that you are saying that climate change happens anyway. Yes it does, but never as fast as in the last century. Not even close. As I said above somewhere, the scientists make these conclusions by consensus therefore the reports must be middle of the road as you will always find someone who will believe things happen faster or slower. These scientists are from all disciplines, all countries with all ideologies and there is 10,000 or more of them.

These people ARE the experts in their fields, why, if they put through thoroughly vetted reports, should we not believe them.....the only reason I can think of is that we just don't want to. Either because it is too hard for our fragile egos to accept that we capable of it or because it is not in our current financial interest to accept it (maybe we just pine for the good old days).

Every report in the last 20 years stated the earth temp and co2 would rise by X amount and every subsequent one has said "oh I am sorry, it seems we were a bit low on the last prediction, it's rising more". And if there s dis agreement, it not about the basic understanding of climate change, it's about how much or how little the projections will be.

So, yes I am certain that we are the cause. Remember, we are the ones who make tools, we are the ones who mine mineral, burn oil and make dams in China that cause local major seismic activity. Not the apes or the whales. We are also the only species who is capable of wiping out whole other species within a few years and we breed like rabbits, no.

First of all, I find it hard to beleive that scientists or any other discipline can say with any certainty how fast the earths temperature has heated or cooled millions of years ago!

Second many things are decided by concensus. In this country laws are passed by concensus, taxes are levied by concensus in the courts, people are found guilty by concensus. That dosent make them right, law's are repealed, taxes are reduced and sometimes convictions are overturned. were all of these people wrong? probably not, they made the best decision they could with the information they had at the time which the decision had to be made.

Of these 10,000 or more scientist's, how many are actually experts in the field? not many they review the "information" and hypothesis presented by others from which they draw conclusions and maybe come to a concensus.

Since from your way of thinking these supposed experts have determined that the earths temperature has never risen so fast as in the last century, why cant they predict with any certainty what the earths temperature will rise by?

I do not want to believe or not believe what the "experts" say, I do however question all science which is not repeatable, if they cant reliably predict the future temperature what makes you think they can say what the rise was in the past, it dosent make sense! we must question all that is not proven and while these experts I am sure are as smart as they come, they too are human and therfore fallable, and subject to making the facts support there position.

Correct me if I am wrong but I am of the understanding that scientist ask questions form a hypothesis and then set out to prove or disprove there hypothesis, if a government entity or for profit entity see's benefit in the conclusion going one way or another are these same experts not subject to persuasion?

As to your lat point, what happened to the dinosaurs?

MikeHolm
23-09-2011, 07:07 PM
If you "cannot believe" that scientists can tell accurately what the temps 10,000 years ago then I may agree with you but I believe that they can tell withing a good range what those temps were and that is enough to create a working theory. Very little in this natural world can be proven 100%. They have even just "possibly" repudiated E=MC2 over at CERN and are looking for independent tests to see if they are right. Scientists get it wrong too. BUT science doesn't usually work in absolutes but in processes and trends. Outcomes are checked constantly against the theory. If it doesn't play out....the theory gets adapted.

If you want to know who the scientists are look up the IPCC and see who the contributing authors are. I can tell you they are atmospheric scientist, biologists, chemists, physicists, geologist etc, etc, etc from all over the world. I can tell you that you can tell how much CO2 there was in the atmosphere by doing ice core samples at the poles and they can go way way back in time. This is what they do and they are not here to BS people. They noticed trends long before anyone sent them out and the term "global warming" was not even coined yet.

Laws and taxes have nothing to do with the natural order of the world as they are completely human constructs.

Dinosaurs and comets as far as I know and that is the prevailing theory.

The real point here is that we can wait for absolute proof of something we will be waiting a bloody long time and if we have our heads up our a**es that far for that long, we deserve to follow the dinosaurs. So much for our superior intellect.

mikeref
23-09-2011, 07:30 PM
Sitting on the fence here, i have to say that we, the human race, are the first on this planet to use the earths resources to our advantage. Somewhere in our evolution, we became the number one rulers here, able to determine the fate of this planet and all life forms that have to co-exist with us. Never before has there been as many cars on the roads or planes in the air sucking in the air we breathe. Sooner or later, there has to be a tipping point where nature says, enough and fights back..or not... and we die from our own ignorance. Thinking that somewhere out there in space, another species is looking in on us and saying... Nope! If they can't keep their back yard tidy, then we don't want them in ours..mike.

Emmett
23-09-2011, 07:36 PM
They have even just "possibly" repudiated E=MC2 over at CERN and are looking for independent tests to see if they are right. Scientists get it wrong too.

My point exactly!


the·o·ry

   /ˈθihttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəhttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngri, ˈθɪərhttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngi/ http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) Show Spelled[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html) Show IPA
noun, plural the·o·ries. 1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.

2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. Antonyms: practice, verification, corroboration, substantiation.





The problem I have with all of this "global warming" is that the evidence isn't in yet and unlike you mike, I am unwilling to blindly follow the herd of 10,000 or more scientists because they have a "theory" about it. (I'm not from missouri but I may as well be). As you said it is possible that some scientists have found sub atomic particles which are moving faster then the speed of light, if it proves true that they have, then the "theory" E=MC2 will have been proven wrong!

Emmett
23-09-2011, 07:57 PM
So Mike,
I went to the IPCC website and a couple of things caught my attention.

1)The IPCC is a huge and yet very tiny organization. Thousands of scientists (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles-appendix-a.pdf) from all over the world contribute to the work of the IPCC on a voluntary basis as authors, contributors and reviewers. None of them is paid by the IPCC.

If they are not paid by the IPCC then by whom?

2)The IPCC is a scientific body. It reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters.

If they conduct no research then how do they verify the information they are reviewing is accurate?

The point I am trying to make is this: There is an intire new industry spurned on by fear mongering about global warming, can we agree on that? if we can then can we also agree that those in a position to make all the money off of this new industry will stop at nothing to protect that? and if we can agree on that then can we agree that it is possible that the Theory was established to support the industry? and if we can agree on that then maybe we can agree that many, not all, of the reports provided to the ICPP are going to be in support of that theory. What do you think?

MikeHolm
23-09-2011, 08:32 PM
So Mike,
I went to the IPCC website and a couple of things caught my attention.

1)The IPCC is a huge and yet very tiny organization. Thousands of scientists (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles-appendix-a.pdf) from all over the world contribute to the work of the IPCC on a voluntary basis as authors, contributors and reviewers. None of them is paid by the IPCC.

If they are not paid by the IPCC then by whom?

2)The IPCC is a scientific body. It reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters.

If they conduct no research then how do they verify the information they are reviewing is accurate?

The point I am trying to make is this: There is an intire new industry spurned on by fear mongering about global warming, can we agree on that? if we can then can we also agree that those in a position to make all the money off of this new industry will stop at nothing to protect that? and if we can agree on that then can we agree that it is possible that the Theory was established to support the industry? and if we can agree on that then maybe we can agree that many, not all, of the reports provided to the ICPP are going to be in support of that theory. What do you think?

All scientific bodies, like the IPCC, rely on national and university based people to do the research (they are doing it anyway so why not) and this is the way most research that is not "product based for market" research is handled and is why the corporate agenda must be kept out of universities (a loosing proposition from what I see). By their very nature universities are supposed to train students to think objectively in the face of those who wish to co-opt them, be that business, govt or media or religion.

The IPCC doesn't need to pay anyone when they are doing the work as a doctoral thesis or as a prof. Information gained is verified through peer review (and a lot of peer review, both adherents and detractors). All points are taken in account (except for creationism, I believe).

What I ask you is this... our society goes through lots of changes (computers, new cars, airplanes, digital TV etc, etc,) most of which persuade or threaten us into parting with our money for the newest IPAD ir some such. Money is made on this all the time. Is it fear mongering to persuade people that it is for their betterment to do things that pollute less, eat better foods, and look outward at the planet rather than just inward at their own wants?

Yes, there is money to be made in this. I put in solar systems and am into heat pumps partly for the profit but I would not do it if it were not of net gain to both the person and to the climate. I will not sell someone a massive SUV and i don't hear anyone here arguing the necessity of a large SUV. There is no reason that doing good for the planet needs to be done without profit.

I cannot believe the theory was fabricated to support an industry, which didn't exist in the early days of global warming (actually 1000s of theories from 1000s of different people and places). That would take a massive conspiracy for little profit. What you may not know is that I have been in this business for 20 some years now and it has been slim pickings for most of that time. Unlike big oil, gas and nuc, environmental benign power gets less than 0.01% of the subsidies of the big boys so it is hardly a cash cow.

Like I said above somewhere, the IPCC is a consensus organization. All the scientists agree on the written report. Many would go a lot further but must compromise and it is too big of a group to be taken over by one ideology.

chillerman2006
23-09-2011, 08:55 PM
Really? I have no problem with most changes.

So... you must be older than me, right?


Is it possible to be older than you Gary :)

Of all the people I know and of all the people I think I know
you would be top of my list to sit down over a nice meal and have
a real good talk.

Your views and beliefs may differ from mine at times but you have a morral
conviction and a sense of right and wrong that I completely, 100% agree with.

I just don't always come up with the same conclusions as you :) but is that not what
makes life great.

We might not be totaly free to post everything on this site for obvious reasons
but we can have an exchange of oppinions.

All the best
mate taz.

Oh and Ps, regarding the death penalty I'm for it and against it.

I would not be prepard to actualy kill sombody in cold blood.so how could I ask sombody to do that for me.....


taz

.

I must be Mate ;)

An I reckon Taz is older still hiding his age ;);)

R's chillerman

chillerman2006
23-09-2011, 08:56 PM
there are a many great ideas, that are ideals, but most just do not work in practice, because our human nature causes to strive for change. We attempt to evolve to make what we think is a better life.
What is right or wrong is only a perception in time and location.

Hmmm

much food for thought with the last verse especially 'Mad'

R's chillerman

chillerman2006
23-09-2011, 09:49 PM
Gary, the problem with humans is our absolute hubris and arrogance. It is a fact that as individuals, can come up with amazing ideas, philosophical and technical, but as a group we, like most animals, have a herd mentality and lack wisdom to see the effects of our actions. (Example...People say advertising doesn't affect them so why is there an industry...we are easily duped (yes, I really need that Caddy Escalade to move my one kid to school))

The idea that we can separate ourselves from the rest of the world we live in, make all sorts of changes to it (which we do, often without concern or awareness) and expect that at the end of the day, the steak and beer we enjoy now, we will be able to enjoy 20 years down the road is ludicrous.

There is too many of us, 80% of fish in the see are gone (to the point now that some fisherman are selling lesser species as more desirable ones because the good ones are not there any more), Almost every disease is on the rise. And we don't think we have an effect????????

We NEED to respect other animals and we need to realize we are not omnipotent....we need wisdom and it is in short supply.....and....we need to stop idolizing our idiology

Well put Mr Mike

especially the bold type...100% with you on that one Mate

also the fish one is another good point, we are just take take taking and if we carry on like this there will be nothing left for future generations

there needs to be fish farms for all we eat and let the sea have a chance to recover, as its not just the fish we take on the decline but the natural feeders of these and the next in the food chain and onwards

R's chillerman

chillerman2006
23-09-2011, 09:51 PM
Who said we didn't have any effect? Everything affects everything else.

Laws are not the answer. Persuasion begets allies, coercion begets enemies.

So true mate, in every sense.....every action has a reaction

R's chillerman

Gary
23-09-2011, 10:12 PM
What is right or wrong is only a perception in time and location.

Morality cannot be subjective.

Imagine a world where everyone is born color blind. You would mention color, and everyone would say, "Huh?????"

Similarly, the very concept of morality must have it's basis in human instinct or you would mention morality, and everyone would say, "Huh?????"

The very concept of morality cannot exist without an objective basis and that basis must be instinctive.

When attacked by a fellow human, we automatically judge the morality of his actions. When attacked by an animal, we make no such moral value judgement. Morality is a human thing.

MikeHolm
23-09-2011, 11:36 PM
Morality cannot be subjective.

Imagine a world where everyone is born color blind. You would mention color, and everyone would say, "Huh?????"

Similarly, the very concept of morality must have it's basis in human instinct or you would mention morality, and everyone would say, "Huh?????"

The very concept of morality cannot exist without an objective basis and that basis must be instinctive.

When attacked by a fellow human, we automatically judge the morality of his actions. When attacked by an animal, we make no such moral value judgement. Morality is a human thing.

Gary, you are absolutely right. The only problem is that for every human, there is a different definition of morality and so you will never get consensus on the LAWS that all will deem necessary. This is why we must compromise, swallow our pride for some of those laws and move on. As I said before, humility is lacking amongst us humans.
Pride goeth before a fall, as they say

Gary
24-09-2011, 04:14 PM
Gary, you are absolutely right. The only problem is that for every human, there is a different definition of morality and so you will never get consensus on the LAWS that all will deem necessary. This is why we must compromise, swallow our pride for some of those laws and move on. As I said before, humility is lacking amongst us humans.
Pride goeth before a fall, as they say

It's not that complicated. Basic laws enjoy near universal acceptance. As we add laws that are less clearly just, those laws become increasingly difficult to enforce and foster a culture of violence and discontent.

There is a point where persuasion is more effective than coercion.

You may have noticed that popular movements become less popular when they switch from persuasive tactics to coercive tactics. As soon as someone says, "Let's pass a law" it all goes downhill. Where there was token resistance, there is now very substantial and growing resistance. They have abandoned the very tactics which made them popular.

Some people don't like having their minds made up for them.

Emmett
26-09-2011, 12:32 PM
All scientific bodies, like the IPCC, rely on national and university based people to do the research (they are doing it anyway so why not) and this is the way most research that is not "product based for market" research is handled and is why the corporate agenda must be kept out of universities (a loosing proposition from what I see). By their very nature universities are supposed to train students to think objectively in the face of those who wish to co-opt them, be that business, govt or media or religion.

The IPCC doesn't need to pay anyone when they are doing the work as a doctoral thesis or as a prof. Information gained is verified through peer review (and a lot of peer review, both adherents and detractors). All points are taken in account (except for creationism, I believe).

What I ask you is this... our society goes through lots of changes (computers, new cars, airplanes, digital TV etc, etc,) most of which persuade or threaten us into parting with our money for the newest IPAD ir some such. Money is made on this all the time. Is it fear mongering to persuade people that it is for their betterment to do things that pollute less, eat better foods, and look outward at the planet rather than just inward at their own wants?
Fear mongering is the method by which some are persuaded, I am 100% in favour of saving all the resouces we can and using them sparingly, I am 100% in favor of polluting less, I am 100% in favor of eating better foods and I am 100% in favor of looking at the planet as a whole living being. I am not in favor of making law's which force me to make these changes. I am skeptical about the "science". If the science is not good how will we know if the changes proposed will really help? and if it wont then why make the changes?

Yes, there is money to be made in this. I put in solar systems and am into heat pumps partly for the profit but I would not do it if it were not of net gain to both the person and to the climate. I will not sell someone a massive SUV and i don't hear anyone here arguing the necessity of a large SUV. There is no reason that doing good for the planet needs to be done without profit.

Agreed, however if the science is there to support the industry then it may not be good science and if it is not then what?
I cannot believe the theory was fabricated to support an industry, which didn't exist in the early days of global warming (actually 1000s of theories from 1000s of different people and places). That would take a massive conspiracy for little profit. What you may not know is that I have been in this business for 20 some years now and it has been slim pickings for most of that time. Unlike big oil, gas and nuc, environmental benign power gets less than 0.01% of the subsidies of the big boys so it is hardly a cash cow.

Like I said above somewhere, the IPCC is a consensus organization. All the scientists agree on the written report. Many would go a lot further but must compromise and it is too big of a group to be taken over by one ideology.
If many would go a lot further then it stands to reason that many are not in agreement, yes?

MikeHolm
26-09-2011, 09:18 PM
That is not true. They are in agreement on the text of the report but if we are looking at a 1000L container and I said it was at least a 500L container and you said it was at least an 800L container, could we not agree that it was at LEAST a 500L container. It satisfies both our statements.

That is what is happening every time a joint statement comes out of the G8 or G20 or, in this case, the statement says that the earth is rising by 1C over some time period, someone else might think it is 2C but if it is worded "at least 1C" it good for both parties. Consensus....these guys disagree a lot on the degree of change but not the fact that it is changing.

Emmett
27-09-2011, 01:37 PM
Mike,
I see your point, your are a very eloquent debator and your arguments are very persuasive, I would like to say you have convinced me, however I do not yet have a concensus.

Quality
27-09-2011, 03:52 PM
I have learnt that many of us have a different opinion weather correct or not but I have also learnt that if you disagree with one certain member then your defiantly wrong

I have my opinion weather it is correct is off question but what I do know it is my own hence I will stand by it

Gary
27-09-2011, 05:06 PM
I have learnt that many of us have a different opinion weather correct or not but I have also learnt that if you disagree with one certain member then your defiantly wrong

I have my opinion weather it is correct is off question but what I do know it is my own hence I will stand by it

What are laws if not the ultimate attempt to nullify the opinions of others? Once laws are passed, your opinion doesn't matter. What better way to say I am right and you are wrong than to pass a law which forces my will upon you?

Emmett
27-09-2011, 05:54 PM
What are laws if not the ultimate attempt to nullify the opinions of others? Once laws are passed, your opinion doesn't matter. What better way to say I am right and you are wrong than to pass a law which forces my will upon you?

Well said Gary.

Quality
27-09-2011, 07:45 PM
Yes well said
But. The law is what it is and I must be right because I am obviously wrong again

Gary
27-09-2011, 08:04 PM
Yes well said
But. The law is what it is and I must be right because I am obviously wrong again


Are you right about being wrong?... or wrong about being right?

Quality
27-09-2011, 08:11 PM
That is the question
Well questioned

MikeHolm
27-09-2011, 11:23 PM
Now we are getting into semantics;).

I think the bigger question here "are we having a big, negative effect on the planet or not". If you can say with absolute authority, NO, and can absolutely prove it, there is no need for a law or regulation banning something (like R22).

If you cannot prove it and there is lots of evidence supporting the negative effects of "X" product then there is grounds for a regulation or law against it use.

How many people died from asbestosis before we banned it in the western world. Stupidly, Canada still mines and sends it to third world countries where bags of it are opened by people without masks. These people last 5 years working before they can't work and die of the effects. "But if you ban it (the business owner says), my ability to make money on it is reduced and that is against my rights......"

What is right?... difficult question

Gary
27-09-2011, 11:45 PM
Effects on the planet are neither negative nor positive. The planet doesn't care what we do, one way or the other. Obviously, you are not opposed to semantic games.

Gary
27-09-2011, 11:56 PM
"But if you ban it (the business owner says), my ability to make money on it is reduced and that is against my rights......"


Is that a direct quote?... or did you make that up?

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 12:06 AM
I have heard a hundred times business men saying that a regulation is hampering their ability to grow their business and create jobs. You have to go back to economics 101 to know that they are in business to make a profit. Period. There are no ethics courses in most MBA schools and ethics has little role to play in business, according to the business courses I took years ago and echoed by MOST business men I have listened to (and I listen to a lot of them). That is not to say they they live in a vacuum but gaining money is the most important thing to them. Especially in the USA where free enterprise is more of an ideology than anywhere else.

Gary
28-09-2011, 12:13 AM
So... you made that up?

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 12:35 AM
Do you want an actual quote? You will accept nothing else? I can't get one from every business man so....

No, I didn't make it up. No BS

Gary
28-09-2011, 12:39 AM
It's a strawman setup.

Gary
28-09-2011, 01:02 AM
For those who don't know what a strawman argument is: You misstate your opponent's position (set up the strawman) and then debate against that false position (knock down the strawman).

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 01:31 AM
Never heard of a strawman argument but discussions do change direction sometimes.

Enter the healthcare argument (again). Is the reason the American right is against a govt insurance plan because it is against government or because it impedes their ability to make a profit (and a big one at that)?

Gary
28-09-2011, 01:51 AM
Never heard of a strawman argument but discussions do change direction sometimes.

Enter the healthcare argument (again). Is the reason the American right is against a govt insurance plan because it is against government or because it impedes their ability to make a profit (and a big one at that)?

You say you have never heard of a strawman argument... and then you set up yet another strawman.

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 02:05 AM
Very good.....back to the original thought then... I am having a hard time picturing life in your legal utopia. I think I would not want to leave the house for fear of getting sued. It is like hitting a mosquito with a baseball bat.

Gary
28-09-2011, 02:11 AM
Utopia?... who said anything about Utopia?

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 02:18 AM
Well it seems like you believe your vision is closer to utopia than the current system

Gary
28-09-2011, 02:27 AM
Closer to Utopia? You just can't help yourself, can you?

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 11:19 AM
I think you will find that most people have a romantic longing for utopia (their own definition of it). Sometimes is it just looking at the past through rose coloured glasses and believing it was better than now. It seldom was. Much as I remember fondly filling the old StratoChief with 10 of my friends (some in the trunk or boot to you brits) and going to the drivein, I've almost forgot the stench of the old cars lead laden exhaust.......rose coloured glasses.

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 11:35 AM
Closer to Utopia? You just can't help yourself, can you?

You are right, I can't help it.

But it does lead into the earlier point. We are human, and we always have to find a way to fix things or change them even if they are not busted. Example... we have been through 4 or 5 police chiefs in the last 20 years and the new one is implementing changes that the one first one dumped cause it didn't work. He is doing it to make his own mark, that's all.

The point is that we can't help tinkering with peoples lives and our rights (real or imagined) infringe on others and vise versa so how are you going to design a set of laws and regs that work for you and won't get others upset....and are flexible enough to react to things like changes to the environment.

Again....big question

Gary
28-09-2011, 02:24 PM
I think you will find that most people have a romantic longing for utopia (their own definition of it). Sometimes is it just looking at the past through rose coloured glasses and believing it was better than now. It seldom was. Much as I remember fondly filling the old StratoChief with 10 of my friends (some in the trunk or boot to you brits) and going to the drivein, I've almost forgot the stench of the old cars lead laden exhaust.......rose coloured glasses.

And then there are those who envision a perfect world where everyone is forced into submission.

Gary
28-09-2011, 02:34 PM
You are right, I can't help it.

But it does lead into the earlier point. We are human, and we always have to find a way to fix things or change them even if they are not busted. Example... we have been through 4 or 5 police chiefs in the last 20 years and the new one is implementing changes that the one first one dumped cause it didn't work. He is doing it to make his own mark, that's all.

The point is that we can't help tinkering with peoples lives and our rights (real or imagined) infringe on others and vise versa so how are you going to design a set of laws and regs that work for you and won't get others upset....and are flexible enough to react to things like changes to the environment.

Again....big question

I have no problem at all with changes, so long as they are not forced on people. If you can't get your way with persuasion, then you can't get your way. If you can't sell your ideas, then too bad.

paul_h
28-09-2011, 02:41 PM
Wow 4 pages! Seems like a troublesome industry we have!
I eke out a living, and go home. I drink on paydays (hopefully every day is a pay day).
No trouble here except for not getting paid.


If you can't get your way with persuasion, then you can't get your way. If you can't sell your ideas, then too bad.
Reminds me of debating issues on internet forums. No hope of anyone being persuaded into changing their opinion, so why bother.

Emmett
28-09-2011, 02:53 PM
Mike,
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder, for example wine, is it good for you or bad for you? both maybe true(at least that is what the science suggests) so do we pass a law saying you must drink at least one glass of wine a day "after all the evidence suggest's that it is good for you" and there is a concensus amoung scientists, and since the government controls the healthcare system and we want everyone to be healthy, we must do this for the good of the people or do we ban wine from the planet because if you drink too much too often it is bad for you and usually those around you and may cause depression which will cause health care costs to rise and so for the good of the people we must ban wine..

...Orrrr do we leave the people to decide for themselves whether they will drink wine in moderation in excess or not at all?

Which way shall it be then Mike?

Gary
28-09-2011, 03:22 PM
Mike,
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder, for example wine, is it good for you or bad for you? both maybe true(at least that is what the science suggests) so do we pass a law saying you must drink at least one glass of wine a day "after all the evidence suggest's that it is good for you" and there is a concensus amoung scientists, and since the government controls the healthcare system and we want everyone to be healthy, we must do this for the good of the people or do we ban wine from the planet because if you drink too much too often it is bad for you and usually those around you and may cause depression which will cause health care costs to rise and so for the good of the people we must ban wine..

...Orrrr do we leave the people to decide for themselves whether they will drink wine in moderation in excess or not at all?

Which way shall it be then Mike?

And before you make that decision, don't forget to factor in all of the rampant crime and violence that occurred due to alcohol prohibition nearly a century ago.

Quality
28-09-2011, 03:29 PM
It's my round my shout and I. Am paying that's my choice
My opinion is that I will get the next round also , the reason is because I can

Emmett
28-09-2011, 06:36 PM
It's my round my shout and I. Am paying that's my choice
My opinion is that I will get the next round also , the reason is because I can

I don't always understand the lingo from across the pond, but if I read this post correctly then I am drinking with Quality!!!

Quality
28-09-2011, 07:44 PM
We seem to read the same lingo

Emmett
28-09-2011, 08:10 PM
We seem to read the same lingo

Cheers!
Emmett

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 10:13 PM
Mike,
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder, for example wine, is it good for you or bad for you? both maybe true(at least that is what the science suggests) so do we pass a law saying you must drink at least one glass of wine a day "after all the evidence suggest's that it is good for you" and there is a concensus amoung scientists, and since the government controls the healthcare system and we want everyone to be healthy, we must do this for the good of the people or do we ban wine from the planet because if you drink too much too often it is bad for you and usually those around you and may cause depression which will cause health care costs to rise and so for the good of the people we must ban wine..

...Orrrr do we leave the people to decide for themselves whether they will drink wine in moderation in excess or not at all?

Which way shall it be then Mike?


I'm with you and Quality, cheers and the next round is on me.

MikeHolm
28-09-2011, 10:17 PM
And before you make that decision, don't forget to factor in all of the rampant crime and violence that occurred due to alcohol prohibition nearly a century ago.

The last thing i want to do is have prohibition again. hell, i like the Italian idea of teaching the young tikes what wine is about at meals without the stupid teenage binge drinking that goes on here because we are oh so puritan.....yea right

Emmett
29-09-2011, 06:52 PM
I'm with you and Quality, cheers and the next round is on me.

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html

Mike,
I thought you might like a little something to read with that cold beer. Quality, you too may be interested in this article.

MikeHolm
29-09-2011, 07:33 PM
Interesting article but check out the author and go to his credentials. He writes for a think tank that states as its mandate;

"Heartland's mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. Such solutions include parental choice in education, choice and personal responsibility in health care, market-based approaches to environmental protection, privatization of public services, and deregulation in areas where property rights and markets do a better job than government bureaucracies."

Organizations (left or right) that are disposed to a particular ideology and are trying to move people to its way of thinking must have their publications excepted with skepticism. We have a similar "think tank" here called the Frasure Institute. Its mandate to promote a right wing free market agenda. No problem except that newspapers and TV will report on some of their research conclusions without telling the public of the organizations mandate.

Case in point....the Frasure Institute put out a paper rating the quality of education in all the Canadian provinces. all the provinces with conservative governments were on the top of the list and at the bottom were the provinces with more liberal governments. Unfortunately, the real numbers were mixed and there was no correlation between the leaning of the government (in this case) and the quality of the education. The author just wanted the quick soundbite that will influence the casual listener...

Don't believe everything you read......now I need a beer.

Gary
29-09-2011, 10:08 PM
So... in your opinion, Heartland Institute is the same as Frasure Institute, therefore because you don't believe what Frasure Institute says, this somehow damages the credibility of Heartland Institute.

And then to prove your point, you bring up a totally irrelevant paper written by Frasure Institute... not Heartland Institute.

And this makes sense to you?

Gary
29-09-2011, 10:58 PM
As far as I'm concerned, his credibility vanished when he characterized others as "alarmist". This in itself doesn't mean he is right or wrong... but it tells me he is biased.

MikeHolm
29-09-2011, 11:35 PM
I wondered why he would say Alarmist if he was not trying to be alarmist. He is not even subtle in his writing. The bias is very obvious.

I think the two think tanks went to the same school, methods are similar and have the same stated goals. An ideologically based organization wouldn't write a report or article that It doesn't believe in, IMO.

MikeHolm
29-09-2011, 11:37 PM
The comparison of the two only shows the similarities. It doesn't matter what the subject matter is. They have the same stated beliefs.

Gary
29-09-2011, 11:49 PM
The comparison of the two only shows the similarities. It doesn't matter what the subject matter is. They have the same stated beliefs.

You showed the stated beliefs of Heartland, but not the stated beliefs of Frasure. How is that a comparison?

And even if their beliefs are identical, that says nothing about their individual credibility.

MikeHolm
30-09-2011, 12:08 AM
Here is the first part of the Fraser Institute mission statement (it is longer than this):

Our vision is a free and prosperous world where individuals benefit from greater choice, competitive markets, and personal responsibility.
Our mission is to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government interventions on the welfare of individuals.


It is a bit more subtle than the Heartland statement, I think, but if you look at the speakers, researchers and mentors, and listen to interviews on the radio (as I do) it becomes obvious that they are quite similar.

Gary
30-09-2011, 12:34 AM
And all of this is irrelevant anyway. The important question is not who said it, why they said it, what organization they belong to or if that organization shares beliefs with another organization, etc... but whether there is or is not measured data which contradicts the computer models.

When an accurate real world measurement contradicts a calculation, the calculation is wrong.

MikeHolm
30-09-2011, 12:40 AM
And all of this is irrelevant anyway. The important question is not who said it, why they said it, what organization they belong to or if that organization shares beliefs with another organization, etc... but whether there is or is not measured data which contradicts the computer models.

When an accurate real world measurement contradicts a calculation, the calculation is wrong.

As long as the measurement methodology is correct and bias is accounted for....you are absolutely correct.

Emmett
30-09-2011, 01:13 PM
The Title of the article clearly states the intention of the author, it is biased and is intended to be. That does not however negate the fact that NASA which provide's a lot of atmospheric data to the scientific community, has provided Data not modeling, which suggests that the tank is neither 800L nor 500L but something much less.
"In God we trust all others bring data"

MikeHolm
30-09-2011, 01:27 PM
And data can be interpreted in many ways depending on the desires of the interpreter. Therefore I look at this particular interpretation as highly suspect and would even go so far as to say it is pure rubbish.

Gary
30-09-2011, 01:58 PM
And data can be interpreted in many ways depending on the desires of the interpreter. Therefore I look at this particular interpretation as highly suspect and would even go so far as to say it is pure rubbish.

So you acknowledge that scientists interpret data to fit their political agendas?

Emmett
30-09-2011, 06:32 PM
And data can be interpreted in many ways depending on the desires of the interpreter. Therefore I look at this particular interpretation as highly suspect and would even go so far as to say it is pure rubbish.

Again you make my point for me. Curious though, what makes this so suspect to you?

MikeHolm
01-10-2011, 12:48 AM
It is quite simple. As I may have said somewhere before, my better half is a medical researcher and she teaching something called "outcome measurement", at a large university, to post doctorate smarty pants types. These are the cream of the crop doctors and surgeons. Anyway, point is, she works hard to keep bias out of research data and she is well known as an extremely ethical researcher to the point where big pharma is wary of her.

It is well known in the Med research field that scientists who take money from industry have more attention paid to their research to strip it of bias. Researchers tied to hospitals and universities who get grant money from government agencies such as the National Institutes of Health in the US or the Canadian Institute for Health Research in Canada don't have nearly as much financial reason to put a bias into the research (and it is not usually political bias as much as something that will make them rich). This is not to say there is no bias but each grant goes through a lot of peer review and review by the journals long before it would be published. There have been some notable docs who made claims that were found out to have been absolute BS for their own gain and no one in the industry will talk to them anymore. I can think of two at the moment.

No one escapes this unless they write an article in a "friendly" publication of for an agency that has the same political bias and don't care what respectable researchers think. They are often out for soundbites.

Sorry for the rambling remarks but this kind of thing is often a topic at the dinner table. Anyone who writes an article calling people "alarmists" is stating a bias and that is not hard to see.

So, my point is that anyone who is blatantly political will be dis-credited pretty quickly in the eyes of their community as having high quality research.