Actually, the load shift problem has been solved. You use a dual reservoir small hydro system, pumping water uphill with surplus daytime power and generating it on demand. It takes space, but is relatively inexpensive and is essentially a near maintenance free battery that's as big as your reservoirs and pumps.

All of the progress that's been made on so many fronts, decades long uphill battles in many cases ... soon to be gone or in serious jeopardy. One can *hope* that the myriad of impending lawsuits, the depositions etc. etc. against this acid tongued, classless carnival barker will have an impact of some import ... not that Pence would be any kind of prize in my mind either [sigh]. I am deeply embarrassed and ashamed for our Nation. Those who would compromise their morals and values to cast a vote in support of this man/child for *any reason* speaks volumes as to their lack of character and conviction. Never underestimate the power and sheer magnitude of the easily duped. Color me incredulous and sincerely grieving for future generations

Wow, I had no idea people though glaciers retreating meant the ice was actually going uphill. It's hard to understand how anybody could think that if they considered it for more than 30 seconds.

Yes, glaciers are like rivers, the ice plastically deforms and flows around obstacles. If anyone wants to see some great footage of this sort of thing, look up Chasing Ice

When someone says something like "we're exploiting parallel universes", what they mean is that one of the many theories that can be used to describe quantum behaviour such as entanglement is to do with parallel universes.

That doesn't mean there aren't other theories, it doesn't mean there are parallel universes, it's just one of the few ways we can make it make sense is if it exists and carries information in a dimension that is not tangible to us.

When Archimedes invented his screw, using gravity to drive water uphill, he could have said that he's using an invisible multi-dimensional goblin to move the water; well that's one theory and its irrefutable until Newton makes an appearance. And even then you can still say "yeah but what we know of gravity is still a multidimensional goblin."

Having said that, it has as much likelihood of being correct as any other theory in its infancy.

Wikipedia
"The combat side stroke is a relaxing and very efficient swim stroke that is an updated version of the traditional sidestroke. The CSS is a mix of sidestroke, freestyle and breaststroke. The combat side stroke allows the swimmer to swim more efficiently and reduce the body's profile in the water in order to be less likely to be seen during combat operations if surface swimming is required. The concept of CSS has been that it can be used with or without wearing swim fins (flippers), the only difference being that when wearing swim fins the swimmer's legs will always be kicking in the regular flutter kick motion without the scissor kick. This stroke is one of the strokes that can be used for prospective SEAL candidates in the SEAL physical screening test (PST), which includes a 500-yard swim in 12 minutes 30 seconds to determine if the candidate is suitable to go to the Basic Underwater Demolitions/SEAL school.

Basics

The combat side stroke utilizes the three main fundamentals of swimming:

Balance: There are two things that affect your balance in the water - the head and lungs. Most people when swimming, especially when using breaststroke, will swim with their head up[citation needed] which forces their hips to sink down which is like they are swimming uphill and is a sign of being less comfortable. However, if the body is flat/horizontal or more parallel to the water-line it is far more effective and will allow the swimmer to feel more comfortable in the water.
Length: The taller the person is, the faster the speed through the water. As a result, it is important that the swimmer is fully stretched horizontally in the water, as this will reduce the body's drag through the water and allow a higher speed.
Rotation: In most sports, such as baseball, when the batter swings the baseball bat they will rotate the hips to increase the power of the swing. The same principle is applied to swimming. If the swimmer engages the hips and uses the body's core muscles it will increase power."

You rather nailed it.

Nah, I'm in Victoria. We get, on average, a month more sun than Seattle. Hasn't been what even Sacramento would call a snow fall in a couple years. Average winter Temps are in the low to high 30s at worst nowadays.

Used to get a lot colder when I was a kid and going to school was the obligatory uphill both ways.

glad i was cruising the comments,otherwise i would have never seen your reply.(you replied on your own page).

good to hear things are moving forward my friend.be patient,good ideas take a bit of time to take root.

i simply asked because i was impressed with your exchange with newtboy and your subsequent comments.you appear to be taking the far (though slower) tactic of sticking to the facts and dealing with people in a respectful and open-minded manner.

i think that is the best way to go,though it will not garner you the insta-following that hyperbole and drama that many vegans adopt to convey their message.

that only works in the short run,and in the end you will just find yourself preaching to the choir.a rabid,aggressive and morally questionable choir.all residing in an echo chamber,smelling their own farts.

what you are attempting is hard,will take time but ultimately will be beneficial for everybody.the information you are trying to get across is important and you are challenging not only deep set traditions but also the incredibly bad impression many vegans have left in so many people psyche.

nobody wants to listen to a self-righteous person who behaves as if their choices make them the arbiters of morality,kinda like born again christians.they will simply tune you out at best or ridicule you at worst.

who knows?
maybe you could even change my mind!

(although i aint ever giving up bacon,so let that one go)

guess i am just rooting for you because i know the uphill battle you are facing,and am wishing you luck.
stay awesome man!

ps:maybe you could start to post videos to illuminate the subject you are so passionate about? just an idea.

There is some noise in the YT as to whether it's a MIDI being played or not.. But it sounds like a fairground organ, and the punchcard tracks being fed into it as well as the organ action matches the song being played so... They have an uphill climb to convince me they did anything other than properly record the audio instead of using the microphone on the camera.

Lovin' the bronzer look iaui! It's all uphill from here ... undeniably invigorating to be sure. Congratulations

Lazy arse downhiller... misses the jump at 1:32 and then won't even pedal uphill

Yes, you did say all that, but you also said none of that is a problem, at least not one to be really worried about. To me, that sounds a lot like climate change denial 3.0, where 1.0 was 'it's not happening at all, don't panic', 2.0 was 'it's happening, but it's natural and normal, don't panic' and 3.0 is 'it's human caused, but no problem, don't panic'. All of those are arguments designed to stall, not to be correct. If I'm reading you wrong, I apologize, but I've heard that argument before from those definitely in that camp.

If the IPCC says it won't be disastrous, yes, we would disagree, because I say it already is, and so have they in their summaries of their last few reports. Just abnormal drought alone is disastrous in many places worldwide already, as is increased flooding in some areas. I did not read the entire PDF's, only what you quoted because they were only linked as downloads/files, and I don't download files from sites I don't recognize.

I linked the first google search pages that came up with water/glacial data, not the other dozen that said the same, or near the same thing, not the NOVA on glacial retreat that said the same thing, not the movie on the same topic with photographic proof of the retreats-Chasing Ice. You ignored that they did list their source for the 2/3 of Chinese cities low on water and the 50% loss of glacial mass per decade as the Chinese military and claimed they were source less so easily dismissed.
As for the diatoms and shellfish, I've seen numerous studies on them, and again just grabbed the first one that came up in a search with data. You seemed to dismiss it as well, but it's not alone. In one snail study I saw, the woman said the last few years it had become nearly impossible to get measurements because the snail shells literally turn to paste in her fingers and weighed nearly nothing! I'm glad to read now that you don't disagree that it's an issue, you only think it's not severe?

I'm not holding my breath on fusion or fission, we've heard the 'we're only 5 years away from fission/fusion' line before about as often as 'Iran is only 2 years away from having a nuclear bomb', but we can agree on wind and solar, except I say it is great for base load, you just need to pair it with micro hydro storage (pump water uphill with surplus solar/wind, then run micro hydro at night). Small solar/wind also decentralizes production, safeguarding from terrorism, and is quite cost effective. Mine paid for itself in well under 10 years.

My issue with your position is that what we do today just with CO2 production reduction won't really effect the atmosphere for 20-200 years (the accepted lifespan of 65-85% of atmospheric CO2, the remaining 15-35% takes thousands of years to be trapped) and that's only IF the ocean CO2 sink continues functioning, so we're already well past the point of avoiding moderate climate change. Without quick action, feedback loops like methane and/or ice sheets melting make the problem exponentially larger and difficult/impossible to manage at all. It may already be too late even if we cut to zero CO2 tomorrow, but it's certainly too late to avoid more, massive, unsolvable global issues if we don't even mitigate them before 2050.

Let's not get into the quagmire of global dimming from sulfur in coal actually mitigating a large part of expected global warming by reflecting sunlight. I've yet to hear a plan or study involving that variable.

Sam Harris is sharp as ever. Cenk loses damn near every point. I can genuinely not see how anyone can think Cenk "won" this debate.

@enoch I must say that I'm disappointed if that's what you're walking away with from this clip. Cenk seems to misunderstand most of what Harris is trying to say, and when he explains further Cenk brushes it off and changes the subject in, to use the wording from the video, a scatter shot way. Grabbing parallels or examples from seemingly random and unrelated ways. It feels like Harris is fighting an uphill battle which is tiring him, so there's a lot of repetitions to try and hammer the points home. Sadly they seem to fall on deaf ears.

I don't see any arrogance in the video, granted I'm missing the last 30 minutes or so.

These roads would be 1 part of the solution. Cheap stable energy storage connected to "the grid" is the other part. Even if all the roads generate energy in the daytime, it has to be stored somewhere. Lead acid batteries have a good density/cost ratio, but require a lot of maintenance. Pumping water uphill or pressurizing underground cavity are other options in use today.

The biggest problem I see is dirt. The roads get dirty, they are less efficient. How much energy do we spend cleaning them?

So, a little birdie told me my comments resonated a bit. I just wanted to followup on that.

Above all; life hasn't given anyone turdinade in the context of this site. It's given us a really well maintained site with a well-meaning community, so don't take my criticism to be pooh-poohing what I visit every day and am really thankful for.

Secondly, my only real criticism was that the 'sift leaned heavily in the direction of the 'cool-kids club', in that you had to prove yourself to be acknowledged as a viable member.
There is nothing wrong with that in and of itself.
If I were to suggest *anything* be changed it's from a an entirely , selfish, subjective and personal perspective, and the only thing that has ever come to mind is this: If someone's been around for years, participates in some form regularly, and isn't a complete asshole, maybe they should get additional member benefits.
Otherwise it just seems the site could be more balanced for its own features and functions. I supposedly have 38 Power Points saved up, but I've no idea what I can do with them, and siftbot knocks my hand aside every time I try to do even the most seemingly innocent thing.

Also, this opinion has also been formed in complete ignorance of the rules or steps necessary to gain more privileges on the site. My initial negative feelings toward the gated privileges caused me to never care enough to look up what I might have to do in order to grow more.

At any rate this turns the whole topic into an Artician-pity-party (cause: 'wah! I don't sift videos and partake in the predetermined path to membership, and I'm butt-hurt I don't have more status/authority/control over the basic features of the website!") and ultimately, that's the only place my gripe was coming from.
I've known others to feel similarly in the past, though never spoken to anyone at length about it, and I can imagine that the rules as they are have turned away many people over the years who otherwise might have stuck around if they didn't have to fight an uphill battle to get rid of that horrid, red 'P' next to their names.

<3

right. and what tries to stop corporations...or anything for that matter from encroaching on our civil liberties too much? Gov't.

What stops gov't from doing the same? People. People have a pretty good track record of stopping gov't that goes too far armed or not. Are people generally slow to react? sure...but they do eventually react to injustices. If gov't really did not rule by the consent of the governed, there would be heaps more unrest, There would be actual revolts happening on a semi frequent basis instead of just people threatening to revolt/secede for the sake of drama.

The problem is, we have a non-insignificant number of people who seem to honestly think corps should run everything, or at the very least, there should be little to no regulation. Like I said, right now, it's chaotic because we have far too many people who all want different things. Over time, we're going to see what works and what doesn't and things will generally settle down. bad ideas do eventually get thrown out and good ideas get implemented instead. Part of the problem is that we are in the middle of big technological changes that radically change how we live compared to even just 100 years ago. Again...chaos ensues when new things come up and it just takes time for people to figure it out, adapt, and accept change.

Honestly though, no one has yet to successfully explain how society without gov't...or amoral corporations works. who distinguishes between the amoral corps and the good ones? are there good corps in a non-statist view? if there are...then don't there have to be good gov'ts out there too? Or are we back to the viewpoint of all gov'ts are bad...but some corps are good...I don't see how you can objectively make that distinction. How do you prevent stuff from just devolving into "might makes right" no one seems to be able to answer that one. I think the human race as a whole has collectively decided that rule by force is not preferred. There are just too many people that would take advantage of and screw over other people. or are you honestly advocating a kill or be killed situation here? Again, I think people have decided as a whole that they don't want that.

There's just too much subjective viewpoints instead of objective ones.

I'm sorry, but you've got one heck of an uphill battle trying to convince people that gov't is inherently bad. Sure you've got a lot of loudmouths making a lot of noise about how they think gov't is corrupt, but that's a far cry from actually abandoning gov't. Lots of people bitch about gov't, but don't actually see a lot of people escaping it. We see it every election cycle "if so and so wins, I'm leaving the country" yet they never do.

regardless of what side of the aisle you sit on, for all the bluster and rhetoric most people would rather have gov't run by the party they don't like than have no gov't at all.