Its Time To talk About Water...

1234579

Comments

  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Jeanie wrote:
    Yeah, it's hard to tell, (he has such a great poker face! :p ) but me thinks little jlew was being sarcastic with this post. :D

    Not that there's anything wrong with that! ;)

    i like jlew. he's a good bloke. i just wanted to throw their existance out there for those who didn't know. oh; and here he comes. sssshhhhhhhh. let's hide!
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    onelongsong wrote:
    i like jlew. he's a good bloke. i just wanted to throw their existance out there for those who didn't know. oh; and here he comes. sssshhhhhhhh. let's hide!


    :D I saw this really cool bush survival program a couple of months ago about how to put a plastic bag over a tree branch if you're lost in the bush so you can start gathering fresh water. And how they reckon you should do it as soon as you realize you're lost and before you do anything else EVEN if you have water with you. It was really interesting. Not that I'm planning on getting lost in the bush anytime soon. Although....that last weekend...when we walked down to the second bridge and the dark came on real quick, well I was grateful to have the dog with me I can tell you! I've been lost out there in that bush before and it's scary! AND BLOODY COLD!!! :eek:

    Anyway, jlew is a good bloke you're right, and I'm losing interest in this thread fast so yeah, let's hide! ;):D
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    onelongsong wrote:
    water samples are taken every day. and municipailties ARE making conservation laws FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. i can't imagine a MANDATE where i have to rip out my loo and replace it before the toilet police get here.
    every lake is tested and thus the eating restrictions i talked about earlier. but if you want to stress your point; how thick are these layers? if i am in a lake; how do i identify a layer? can you back up this layer theory with a scientific link that proves water is taken from these layers? if it's true; it should be easy to find.

    New construction does have mandates but so do all consumer products. So, if your loo were to have to be replaced it would have to be replaced with a certain type of loo that fits the purpose of the law. These laws already exist and they will be expanding into many more facets of our lives. Eg. windows, vehicles, fridges, heating and a/c products will have a minimum energy efficiency value.

    I cannot find a good reference to the types of layer that is preferential to take municipal waters from but the top layer of water is usually 25 ft deep. This layer has all sorts of crap in it and does not easily mix, due to the difference in tempurature and composition, with the layers below it.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Mestophar wrote:
    New construction does have mandates but so do all consumer products. So, if your loo were to have to be replaced it would have to be replaced with a certain type of loo that fits the purpose of the law. These laws already exist and they will be expanding into many more facets of our lives. Eg. windows, vehicles, fridges, heating and a/c products will have a minimum energy efficiency value.

    I cannot find a good reference to the types of layer that is preferential to take municipal waters from but the top layer of water is usually 25 ft deep. This layer has all sorts of crap in it and does not easily mix, due to the difference in tempurature and composition, with the layers below it.

    so if my pond is 15 feet deep; the top layer goes 10 feet into the ground?
    sunlight will penetrate approximately 2 feet of infertile water and 1 foot of fertile water. that is your top layer. the sunlight warms the molicules and they move faster. there's another layer just off the bottom. there's sediment and then suspended sediment. the layer of suspended sediment depends on the fertility of the water. fertile water will have a thicker layer of suspended sediment. then you have inbetween the two. it could be 5 feet thick or hundreds of feet thick. depending on the depth of the body of water. now that body of water will have differences in AREAS; not depths. for example; in a patch of seaweed the water will be a little different. even the Ph will be different. but this is an area; not a layer.

    if me loo doesn't fail; the loo police won't be knocking at my door.
    as far as all the other crap; it's too little too late. if you listened to us in the 70's; we wouldn't be having this conversation. if you weren't born yet; go ask your parents why this is the world they wanted you to inherit. they had a choice.
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    onelongsong wrote:
    so if my pond is 15 feet deep; the top layer goes 10 feet into the ground?
    sunlight will penetrate approximately 2 feet of infertile water and 1 foot of fertile water. that is your top layer. the sunlight warms the molicules and they move faster. there's another layer just off the bottom. there's sediment and then suspended sediment. the layer of suspended sediment depends on the fertility of the water. fertile water will have a thicker layer of suspended sediment. then you have inbetween the two. it could be 5 feet thick or hundreds of feet thick. depending on the depth of the body of water. now that body of water will have differences in AREAS; not depths. for example; in a patch of seaweed the water will be a little different. even the Ph will be different. but this is an area; not a layer.

    if me loo doesn't fail; the loo police won't be knocking at my door.
    as far as all the other crap; it's too little too late. if you listened to us in the 70's; we wouldn't be having this conversation. if you weren't born yet; go ask your parents why this is the world they wanted you to inherit. they had a choice.

    Huh? Nice try but we are not talking about your pond... :rolleyes:

    Listened to us? Who are you representing?
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    Oh and congratulations on your perfection and virtuous life you live.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    Mestophar wrote:
    Oh and congratulations on your perfection and virtuous life you live.

    Seriously if you've got one ounce of humanity in you then perhaps you could see your way clear to behaving like a decent human being and reading what was said and not being nasty for 5 minutes.
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    Jeanie wrote:
    Seriously if you've got one ounce of humanity in you then perhaps you could see your way clear to behaving like a decent human being and reading what was said and not being nasty for 5 minutes.

    Wow, a bit melodramatic perhaps? I'd say take a pill but... :wink:

    P.S I wish I had an ounce of humanity.

    Mosquitos are hard to ignore.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    Mestophar wrote:
    Wow, a bit melodramatic perhaps? I'd say take a pill but... :wink:

    P.S I wish I had an ounce of humanity.

    Mosquitos are hard to ignore.

    Nope. Not melodramatic at all. Just a simple request based on me knowing more about the situation than you. Tis entirely up to you what you do.
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    OLS whatever reply you're working on, quit now and get your arse into that recliner please. :) It's time to rest. :)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Mestophar wrote:
    Huh? Nice try but we are not talking about your pond... :rolleyes:

    Listened to us? Who are you representing?

    dude; you're in my back yard. i worked for years (part time) with the marine biologist from the shed aquarium in chicago. i dug a pond when i lived in grayslake where i raised fish. not to mention that i've fished around the world. from the time i could hold a rod. me mum has the pictures to prove it. i'm farm raised and agriculture has been a big part of my life. i'm now the second biggest supplier of naturally raised buffalo meat. i'm 51 and i've got a lot of experience behind me. i stay up to date with everything and i'm solar and connected to your world via satellite.
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    onelongsong wrote:
    dude; you're in my back yard. i worked for years (part time) with the marine biologist from the shed aquarium in chicago. i dug a pond when i lived in grayslake where i raised fish. not to mention that i've fished around the world. from the time i could hold a rod. me mum has the pictures to prove it. i'm farm raised and agriculture has been a big part of my life. i'm now the second biggest supplier of naturally raised buffalo meat. i'm 51 and i've got a lot of experience behind me. i stay up to date with everything and i'm solar and connected to your world via satellite.


    :D hehe! And you're going to lie down now right????

    Man I can't believe you got me nagging in public! :o

    We can talk water tomorrow ok? Now scram! :p
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    A bloke is a good thing right ;):D
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    lawns are the biggest symbols of environmental stupidity out there ... we use water to grow it only so we can then cut it every week ... we pour litres of toxic poisons to prevent weeds from growing on it ...

    naturalizing peoples front yards would make a huge difference in our water usage ... but people are stupid and selfish
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    polaris wrote:
    lawns are the biggest symbols of environmental stupidity out there ... we use water to grow it only so we can then cut it every week ... we pour litres of toxic poisons to prevent weeds from growing on it ...

    naturalizing peoples front yards would make a huge difference in our water usage ... but people are stupid and selfish

    thats a very good point. and defintely seems like a ridiculous waste. do you have a lawn?
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    jlew24asu wrote:
    thats a very good point. and defintely seems like a ridiculous waste. do you have a lawn?

    i don't own a home ... but the place i rent (my friends house) doesn't ... we have a naturalized backyard with bushes and plants ... doesn't need watering ... there are bushes out front ...
  • surferdude
    surferdude Posts: 2,057
    polaris wrote:
    i don't own a home ... but the place i rent (my friends house) doesn't ... we have a naturalized backyard with bushes and plants ... doesn't need watering ... there are bushes out front ...
    How does a naturalized backyard compare to a lawn as far as heat retention in the summer? Are naturalized landscapes contributing at all to global warming compared to a designed landscape with grass and trees?

    How did they ever get the misnomer naturalized landscape? There's nothing natural about them. They're really just low maintenance and low utility landscaping. They sure don't encourage physical activity. I've seen them used quite well in front yards but they are quite useless if you have kids and are trying to promote or live a fit and active lifestyle.

    The tough thing is that there is no universal ideal. What works for one person or household does not work for another. But it sure doesn't seem to prevent finger pointing or hypocritical stances being taken by many. Polaris that is not aimed at you in any way, just an observation in general.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    surferdude wrote:
    How does a naturalized backyard compare to a lawn as far as heat retention in the summer? Are naturalized landscapes contributing at all to global warming compared to a designed landscape with grass and trees?

    How did they ever get the misnomer naturalized landscape? There's nothing natural about them. They're really just low maintenance and low utility landscaping. They sure don't encourage physical activity. I've seen them used quite well in front yards but they are quite useless if you have kids and are trying to promote or live a fit and active lifestyle.

    The tough thing is that there is no universal ideal. What works for one person or household does not work for another. But it sure doesn't seem to prevent finger pointing or hypocritical stances being taken by many. Polaris that is not aimed at you in any way, just an observation in general.

    i'm not sure what you mean by heat retention? ... it's called 'naturalized' because we planted trees, bushes that were native to the area before - and which would theoretically thrive in the environment thus requiring less maintenance ... they don't contribute to global warming because plants and trees absorb co2 ... way more then grass ... and you don't need to use water or pesticides ...

    and i really don't see your point about a lawn = promoting a fit and active lifestyle ... it's a stretch to say that you need a lawn in order to provide that for kids ... isn't that what parks and soccer teams are for? ... or perhaps taking them for walks? ... and what about gardening itself? ... why can't that be part of a fit and active lifestyle?

    in any case - i stand by my point that lawns are generally stupid ...
  • surferdude
    surferdude Posts: 2,057
    polaris wrote:
    and i really don't see your point about a lawn = promoting a fit and active lifestyle ... it's a stretch to say that you need a lawn in order to provide that for kids ... isn't that what parks and soccer teams are for? ... or perhaps taking them for walks? ... and what about gardening itself? ... why can't that be part of a fit and active lifestyle?
    Having an easily accessible outdoor safe area for kids to play is an essential part of providing a fit and active lifestyle for kids. A backyard with a lawn where kids can safely play outside goes a long way to having healthy kids. We played everything from football, to baseball, to tag, to having skating rinks in the winter in our backyards. All are only possible due to having lawns.
    polaris wrote:
    in any case - i stand by my point that lawns are generally stupid ...
    Then don't have one. But please don't pass judgement on people who do. Their reasons for having one can be just as important or more important than your reasons for not having one.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    surferdude wrote:
    Having an easily accessible outdoor safe area for kids to play is an essential part of providing a fit and active lifestyle for kids. A backyard with a lawn where kids can safely play outside goes a long way to having healthy kids. We played everything from football, to baseball, to tag, to having skating rinks in the winter in our backyards. All are only possible due to having lawns.
    Then don't have one. But please don't pass judgement on people who do. Their reasons for having one can be just as important or more important than your reasons for not having one.

    i suppose if one gets offended by the statement that lawns are stupid - then yeah i can see where you are getting at ...

    consider yourself fortunate to have a lawn big enuf to play football and hockey rinks - where i live - we have to walk to the park for that ... i suppose if everyone had a lawn that size - we'd need 3 times the earth ... and hopefully, you aren't spraying your lawns with toxic pesticides and then having your kids play on it cuz that would be counteracting your healthy lifestyle ...

Categories