search results matching tag: pour

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (288)     Sift Talk (15)     Blogs (32)     Comments (953)   

The Black Stuff

noims says...

I will say, though, that for what pretty much amounts to an ad for the stuff, the pours are terrible. As an Irish Guinness drinker what he did to that poor pint around 2:57 made me physically wince.

New Rule: Distinction Deniers

JiggaJonson says...

There are a few times in this thread where I would describe a lack of appreciation for degrees of the term "forced"

Part of why I don't consider what happened to me to be rape is because I had a mouthful of tea at the time.

Getting burned by hot tea because the other person doesn't react exactly the way I want when I want them to is a risk I was willing to take when we started pouring tea into each other's mouths. A touch too much or too little is to be expected given the situation.

I'd argue that only after that touch-and-go phase is where the place that "the line" gets crossed, and I'm annoyed at the lack of thorough acknowledgement that errors get made in those moments.

Fuck, girls go fucking crazy when they are climaxing. They dun like break a dude's dick in half and shit. Sheeeeeeeet.

ChaosEngine said:

You're overcomplicating it.

Wordless assent is fine, especially in an already committed relationship.

The issue here is less about consent and more about refusal.

If you're feeding each other and someone wants you to stop, just stop. Ok, if you're literally pouring tea into them at the time, it's not going to be instantaneous, but it's still pretty clear that they're no longer into it. Especially if they say "no" or try to push you away.

This isn't rocket science.

New Rule: Distinction Deniers

ChaosEngine says...

You're overcomplicating it.

Wordless assent is fine, especially in an already committed relationship.

The issue here is less about consent and more about refusal.

If you're feeding each other and someone wants you to stop, just stop. Ok, if you're literally pouring tea into them at the time, it's not going to be instantaneous, but it's still pretty clear that they're no longer into it. Especially if they say "no" or try to push you away.

This isn't rocket science.

JiggaJonson said:

Meh, I don't like that analogy.

If it were an accurate analogy, both people would be holding the cup of tea at the same time.

As I said, the two people are working in tandem. So she and I would be holding the tea with both hands, and we would bring the cup to her mouth to drink and then mine, and so on. Or even if only one person is holding the tea and only receiving instruction;

Think about a time when you've fed someone else food or poured a drink into someone else's mouth. Ever give them more than they wanted? Not enough? Ever spill some of it on their shirt even though you never intended for that to happen?

Remember!!! It's like a game of Operation! Don't give them a drop more or less than they want when you're pouring tea into their mouth or your entire life will be ruined.

Try pouring hot tea into someone else's mouth for them, do it deliberately and without error, and then we'll talk. Finally, consider that pouring hot tea into someone else's mouth is arguably less complicated than interpreting physical cues indicating a desire to have sex.

Those kinds of over simplifications of the nuances of human behavior are just that, over simplifications.

New Rule: Distinction Deniers

JiggaJonson says...

Meh, I don't like that analogy.

If it were an accurate analogy, both people would be holding the cup of tea at the same time.

As I said, the two people are working in tandem. So she and I would be holding the tea with both hands, and we would bring the cup to her mouth to drink and then mine, and so on. Or even if only one person is holding the tea and only receiving instruction;

Think about a time when you've fed someone else food or poured a drink into someone else's mouth. Ever give them more than they wanted? Not enough? Ever spill some of it on their shirt even though you never intended for that to happen?

Remember!!! It's like a game of Operation! Don't give them a drop more or less than they want when you're pouring tea into their mouth or your entire life will be ruined.

Try pouring hot tea into someone else's mouth for them, do it deliberately and without error, and then we'll talk. Finally, consider that pouring hot tea into someone else's mouth is arguably less complicated than interpreting physical cues indicating a desire to have sex.

Those kinds of over simplifications of the nuances of human behavior are just that, over simplifications.

ChaosEngine said:

It's the "consent as a cup of tea" model.

If you ask someone if they want tea, and they do, give them tea.

If they change their mind after you've made the tea, they don't have to drink it.

If they start drinking the tea and decide they don't like this tea, don't force them to finish the cup.

Hell, if they are actually on their last sip and they don't want to swallow... they can spit it out. I mean, it's not very polite, and I'm not really sure why you'd suddenly decide you don't want tea at that point, but fundamentally it's still up to the tea drinker.

Stranger Things | Season 2 "Thriller" Trailer

Zombie Octopus Hates Soy Sauce

How ancient Romans made stronger concrete than today

Payback says...

Imagine waiting 6 months for a single highrise floor pour to set.

That's why modern concrete isn't as strong. It has to set a Hell of a lot quicker to be cost effective.

The Paris Accord: What is it? And What Does it All Mean?

Diogenes says...

I don't support our pulling out of the Paris Accord. I think it was the wrong thing to do. And I don't mind GDP growth for other nations, even China. What I do mind is the notion that the world's greatest polluter can increase its amount of Co2 emitted and still be touted as successfully contributing to reduced Co2 emissions worldwide.

"Telling China to limit their total CO2 emission to pre 2005 values is like telling a teenager in the middle of puberty to limit their food consumption to the same amount as when they were 9 years old. It's just not an option."

Who's telling China to do that? I only suggested that China's pledge to reduce their Co2 emissions to 60-65% of their 2005 levels as a ratio of GDP isn't all that it's made out to be. Your analogy is faulty because food consumption is necessary for life, but spending billions on destroying coral reefs while making artificial islands in the South China Sea is not. The CCP certainly has the funds necessary to effect a bigger, better and faster transition to green energy. Put another way, I believe that China has the potential to benefit both their people through economic growth and simultaneously do more in combating global climate change. I simply don't trust their current government to do it. I've been living in China now for over 19 years...and one thing that strikes me is the prevalence of appearance over substance. Perhaps you simply give them more credence in the latter, while my own perception seems to verify the former.

"But their total emissions is still increasing! This is just a farce and they're doing nothing!"

The second half of your statement is a strawman. They are doing something, just not enough, imho. And China's emissions have yet to plateau, therefore it's not an achievement yet.

"Now you may say "China's not putting funds towards green energy!" Well, that's also not true. China already surpassed the US, in spending on renewable energy. In fact, China spent $103 billion on renewable energy in 2015, far more than the US, which only spent $44 billion. Also, they will continue to pour enormous amounts of resources into renewable energy, far more than any other country."

This is also misleading. What I'm suggesting is that China could do more. It's certainly a matter of opinion on whether the Chinese government is properly funding green initiatives. For example, both your article and the amounts you cite ignore the fact that those numbers include Chinese government loans, tax credits, and R&D for Chinese manufacturers of solar panels...both for domestic use AND especially for export. The government has invested heavily into making solar panels a "strategic industry" for the nation. Their cheaper manufacturing methods, while polluting the land and rivers with polysilicon and cadmium, have created a glut of cheap panels...with a majority of the panels they manufacture being exported to Japan, the US and Europe. It's also forced many "cleaner" manufacturers of solar panels in the US and Europe out of business. China continues to overproduce these panels, and thus have "installed" much of the excess as a show of green energy "leadership." But what you don't hear about much is curtailment, that is the fact that huge percentages of this green energy never makes its way to the grid. It's lost, wasted...and yet we're supposed to give them credit for it? So...while you appear to want to give them full credit for their forward-looking investments, I will continue to look deeper and keep a skeptical eye on a government that has certainly earned our skepticism.

""But China is building more coal plants!" Well that's not really true either. China just scrapped over 100 coal power projects with a combined power capacity of 100 GW . Instead, the aforementioned investments will add over 130GW in renewable energy. Overall, Chinese coal consumption may have already peaked back in in 2013."

Well, yes, it really is true. China announcing the scrapping of 103 coal power projects on January 14th this year was a step in the right direction, and certainly very well timed politically. But you're assuming that that's the entirety of what China has recently completed, is currently building, and even plans to build. If you look past that sensationalist story, you'll see that they continue to add coal power at an accelerating pace. As to China's coal consumption already having peaked...lol...well, if you think they'd never underreport and then quietly revise their numbers upwards a couple of years later, then you should more carefully review the literature.

"So in the world of reality, how is China doing in terms of combating global warming? It's doing a decent job. So no "@Diogenes", China is NOT the single biggest factor in our future success/failure, because it is already on track to meeting its targets."

Well, your own link states:

"We rate China’s Paris agreement - as we did its 2020 targets - “medium.” The “medium“ rating indicates that China’s targets are at the last ambitious end of what would be a fair contribution. This means they are not consistent with limiting warming to below 2°C, let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit, unless other countries make much deeper reductions and comparably greater effort."

And if the greatest emitter of Co2 isn't the biggest factor, then what is? I'm not saying that China bears all the responsibility or even blame. I'm far more upset with my own country and government. But to suggest that China adding the most Co2 of any nation on earth (almost double what the US emits) isn't the largest single factor that influences AGW...I'm having trouble processing your rationale for saying so. Even if we don't question if they're on track to meet their targets, they'll still be the largest emitter of Co2...unless India somehow catches up to them.

To restate my position:
The US shouldn't have withdrawn from Paris.
China is not a global leader in fighting climate change.
To combat climate change, every nation needs to pull together.
China is not "pulling" at their weight, which means that other nations must take up more of the slack.
Surging forward, while "developed" nations stagnate will weaken the CCP's enemies...and make no mistake, they view most of us as their enemies.
The former is part of the CCP's long-term strategy for challenging the current geopolitical status quo.
I believe that the Chinese Communist Party is expending massive amounts of resources abroad and militarily, when the bulk of those funds would better serve their own people, environment and combating the global crisis of climate change.

The Paris Accord: What is it? And What Does it All Mean?

mentality says...

While you can try to be idealistic and point the finger at total CO2 emissions, it's not a practical target for developing countries like China.

It's not a matter of them trying to "grow their economy faster than their emissions". They are a developing country, and their economy will grow fast, whether you like it or not. Telling China to limit their total CO2 emission to pre 2005 values is like telling a teenager in the middle of puberty to limit their food consumption to the same amount as when they were 9 years old. It's just not an option.

Now you may say "But their total emissions is still increasing! This is just a farce and they're doing nothing!" Well, saying that they're doing nothing is not true. Do you know what China's emissions would look like if they did nothing to limit them? Having China's emissions plateau is already quite an achievement, as the alternative is far far worse.

Now you may say "China's not putting funds towards green energy!" Well, that's also not true. China already surpassed the US, in spending on renewable energy. In fact, China spent $103 billion on renewable energy in 2015, far more than the US, which only spent $44 billion. Also, they will continue to pour enormous amounts of resources into renewable energy, far more than any other country.

"But China is building more coal plants!" Well that's not really true either. China just scrapped over 100 coal power projects with a combined power capacity of 100 GW . Instead, the aforementioned investments will add over 130GW in renewable energy. Overall, Chinese coal consumption may have already peaked back in in 2013.

So in the world of reality, how is China doing in terms of combating global warming? It's doing a decent job. So no "@Diogenes", China is NOT the single biggest factor in our future success/failure, because it is already on track to meeting its targets.

Don't let China distract us from our own responsibilities and how shitty of a job Trump is doing.

Diogenes said:

I'm torn by our pulling out of Paris. I think it's critical that we all cooperate to reduce our Co2 emissions. But I also understand that at least what China offered (not) to do is the single biggest factor in our future success (failure).

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

VENGANCE!!!!!

notarobot jokingly says...

In that pouring rain you think they were doubling back to refill a water bottle?

hashtag whyweretheyfilming?

BSR said:

It's strange if you don't have all the facts. He could have doubled back to refill his water bottle. I just want to believe it was real, I guess.

Parquet Courts - Stoned And Starving (Live on KEXP)

shagen454 says...

Hell yeah, I want to promote this but people on the Sift don't give a rat's ass about good music unfortunately.

Definite The Fall, Mark E. Smith vibe, which I like but sorta hate because come on man! Don't copy Mark E. Smith he'll stick his smoke in your retina and pour scotch down the hole!! But the discordant krautrock vibe... I am always up for krautrock rehashes lol, when they're jamming reminds me of some of my old bands

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

How to Pour Concrete Driveway

What happens when you're drunk AND stoned at the same time?



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists