Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by ftbtx, May 10, 2019.
“It fixed itself” ? Really ?
After 30 years of banning CFC...
Point taken... kind of. That's what I mean by doing our part. What percentage of usage do you think has stopped? Not all aerosols have been banned and the whole world did not ban them.
Is it fixed though?
Isn’t this new study that claims the ozone layer isn’t fixed after all evidence against your claim that science is biased against new information that challenges the existing literature? My casual reading of scientific news suggests that well supported claims that run counter to current understanding get way more publicity than confirmations of existing research.
Also, no study has yet found a giant thriving existence of amphibians, as compared to say, 20 years ago.
Where did you get that percentage figure?
Or did you just make it up?
I can make stuff up too, but I prefer to listen to educated, trained people that have spent their lives and careers studying to deserve the label 'expert.' Be it plumbing, bees nest removal, or 'science,' I offer the experts the respect they have earned.
Of course, I am also not easily flimflammed by loudmouths with no training other than in agitating people, so it's easy for me to extend that respect.
From this article: “It is telling that all 142 developing countries were able to meet the 100% phase-out mark for CFCs, halons and other ODS in 2010.”
It’s a 100% phase out by 2030 for the US, and our mark is a 99.5% phase out by 2020. It seems like the developing world has also been able to meet targets.
Oh the 95% - made it up. Can't be bothered dwelling on trying to die. Yes we need to improve, but don't just buy into every waitress with an agenda. Live your lives the best you can, but getting sad looking at a 2600 year old tree is looking at the glass half empty. Its like looking at kids playing in a playground and getting sad because they already started dying. As far I'm concerned that tree is amazing and it should have stayed as a tone wood discussion. You seem to be upset. Oh does someone not agree with you. Sorry. This has taken a bad turn. I had no interest in upsetting you, but I'm not joining the doom and gloom club. Best wishes.
I'm not upset, but thanks for asking. Keep up the good work!
This isn’t like having a difference of opinion on root beer. It’s like having a difference of opinion on gravity.
On average, cypress is as dense as alder and more dense than white/yellow pine and paulownia. I think it's quite underrated as a tonewood for a tele body.
hmmm… according to the engineering charts you are correct. Alder ranges from 400-700 per m3 and cypress is 500. I've built a few pieces of furniture and wainscotting in cypress and the stuff I got was light and soft, probably lumbered from immature trees- it's pretty common down here. Some nice creamy yellow tones in some of it. In contrast, the one partscaster I built in alder was dense and heavy, the sucker is pushing 9lbs. Really nice ringing taptone to the board tho.
We cant even forecast tomorrows weather, add politics and a NWO scam..... Yeah, I bet that would make one sweet Tele....
Cypress is hard enough to be the main choice for the sides/back of flamenco guitars, and again, it's denser/heavier than white/yellow pine and paulownia, which many makers love for their teles.
Hard to know the tone w out hearing examples. As far as Cedar is concerned, I have a grade C board I got from Lowes that has a beautiful almost Cocobolo or metalic tone that I m planning for a bass body.
Here in this Del-Mar-Va-lous land of ours we suppossedly have the northern most Cypress. A friend owns lake front property w lots of them so I ll see if theres any logs around.
Yeah, that would suck...
I would much rather see it made in to a guitar body than fire wood.
Boy are you wrong. A whole bunch of crap is gonna be dying soon. Get educated.
P.S. climate change is not political. it's science.
Well, a member just became extinct.