Venandi

The form it takes and the camouflage it wears is infinitely variable. Because of that, I tend to look closer at the conduct (words, actions, perceived intent etc) of those who insist on invoking over the top Hitler references. For sensible people, especially those who have actually seen, smelled, or experienced the sort of atrocities the name suggests, invoking it in a "white boy Rick" manner utterly fails to resonate. It might be gobbled up by the Herbs and Dogs of the world but that's about it. People in need, those with real pain and real problems sway to more practical concerns and their observations are a result of experience... like this for instance. I can't speak to the voracity of the story, its extent or direct effects, but if true, it's the sort of thing that will burn in the memory of those effected. It's not how you earn votes, win elections or sway opinions... it's how you lose on all three fronts. It's how you brand an entire group with the actions of a few extremists and it's why people will rightly question your willingness to embrace these activists and reluctance to cast them adrift in their own dingy. I'm actually heartened to see that US Democrats seem to attribute their "surprise" loss to "failure to effectively communicate with voters." Hopefully they will concentrate on the packaging, add a few rainbows to the plastic tub that contains their values, and continue to invoke the name of long dead tyrants for many years to come.

And that's the only reason I ever heard of it. I think the context was provincial EMO communications support, interoperability with HAM repeaters, packet communications and first responder radios... or something to that effect, I don't recall exactly. Enjoy.... but I think it only serves to attract like minded players and accomplishes little in the process. You may have noticed that those "like minded players" usually don't have an off switch. I don't see the point... maybe it's just me. Isn't it better for those so inclined to just sign a waiver and step onto the mats? If you actually talked to people that way IRL wouldn't that be the likely outcome or is it a matter of keyboard warriors being insulated by anonymity and screen names? Maybe the world has become excessively passive aggressive from binging out on NETFLIX and that has become the new norm. I don't know what to make of it. Might be a good thread eh? Personally, I could take asymmetric shots at Herb and the kittens forever and a day, it's not my thing though so I simply choose not to do that anymore... and Ironically, that was the point of doing it in the first place. Sorry Herb, best wishes to the kittens. I think I'm done here, sorting through the nonsense for a few snippets of good gen is actually pretty tiresome. Hats off to the fox though, and I mean that sincerely... I would never be able to find the time or inclination. Best wishes to all.

Herb is busy with the kittens...

Throw in ridicule and a healthy dose of arrogance and it becomes breathtaking... On the plus side, it was pretty easy to tell where the Herbs (screaming "horse paste") had never vacationed and what colour hats they never wore.

It was called CPIP back in the day and it included contingency plans for bioterrorism... and that's the only reason I ever heard of it. In the mid 90's I think it gained a few teeth and included emergency preparedness. I'm not suggesting it meets the definition of being a legislated national plan, only suggesting that a plan (such as it was/is) existed as a living document subject to amendment. Frankly, I didn't care enough to read through all of this, I couldn't even remember the name of the plan when I went looking for it... I simply remembered that it existed. It reads a bit like a contingency planning Service Paper and I seem to recall references to it in OPDP material and Aid to Civil Power discussions... just prior to dinosaurs roaming the earth. Here's a link: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7134843/ BTW, why is politeness and rational discussion impossible here? You sound like Herb... Speaking of which, here's an excerpt in case the link qualifies as TLDNR and causes Herb to hatch out multi coloured kittens on the kitchen floor: At the inception of the Canadian Pandemic Influenza Plan (CPIP) in 1988, the main focus was on a vaccine strategy. After the Hong Kong influenza A/H5N1 incident in 1997, the pandemic plan evolved to include a more comprehensive approach, incorporating the following key components: surveillance, vaccine programs, and use of antivirals, health services, emergency services, public health measures and communications. One of the main challenges of pandemic preparedness was to establish the essential close linkages between public health, health care and emergency response sectors. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent anthrax attacks in the United States, national authorities became acutely aware of the need to strengthen public health infrastructure to respond to health emergencies.

You assume wrong. I actually went out of my way to ensure they got recycled (after they were reused and repurposed as target stuffers) usually by submitting them directly to the centre itself. If, despite that effort, they still went into land fill, that falls squarely on the shoulders of the provincial recycling centre. It also means that the loud mouth self righteous advocates and defenders of that bogus effort contributed to the problem by loudly stumping for it at every opportunity... that would be the same folks who now ridicule those who actually complied with what they themselves demanded. I'm starting to think that the big talkers here actually qualify as the biggest frauds. Top of the morning to ya Herb... None of that changes the fact (I shouldn't say fact, it's just my observation) that people who previously repurposed those bags now buy them for the same purposes since the purpose itself still remains. If the bags are actually thicker, and it appears to me that they are, then what exactly was accomplished here? The ability to anticipate and trap the negative effects of unintended consequences is actually part of the planning process when selecting/testing any proposed course of action (COA)... a fact seemingly lost on progressives. By way of example, the push toward defunding police comes instantly to mind as the biggest single example of collective madness in my lifetime, my only question to those folks (most of whom have had a profound change of heart BTW) is WTF did you think was going to happen?

From CBC (today) and right on cue: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/paper-bags-ban-walmart-1.7358649 Makes you wonder what the odds of achieving a coordinated global response to climate change are when we can't even get the bags right. Herb... get yourself a wheelbarrow, they're reusable and they're great exercise. A clear benefit for the planet and your aerobic fitness. And in addition, the attendant reduction in available screen time (while you push it) is sure to be appreciated by forum users. Off topic maybe but not by much... here's a mindlessly wasteful practice in a hungry world: https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/charlebois-canadas-dairy-waste-time-to-legalize-raw-milk Farm boys have been drinking raw milk in excess of quota their entire lives, after leaving the farm and moving on some of them still do, so do their kids... and their grand kids. For context on the amount of waste, an olympic size swimming pool holds 2.5 million litres. By my reckoning, that's about 400 olympic pools worth. Need a plastic straw Herb?

Yes you nasty little troll, I used them for a number of other purposes and I used them to the maximum extent possible... it just seemed wasteful not to do that. In any case, other than the ones used in (things like) house painting, I actually made a point of recycling them. Lots were used as outdoor target stuffers before being recycled. That said, I'm a bit suspicious about the recycling effort itself. I fear the program may be run by incompetent, self righteous fools and that, as you suggest, much of it actually does end up in landfill despite the effort made by people to recycle. Being as you seem to identify with that group, I reluctantly defer to your assessment because it sounds foolish enough to be true. Probably to much reading for ya here (that TLDNR thing) but the point was (and remains) that anyone who actually did use them for other purposes (yes, like me) is now buying them for the exact same purpose and the ones they're buying seem to be thicker. As a result, It wouldn't surprise me to learn that there's been an increase in overall plastic recycling and disposal as a direct result... which seems contrary to the original intent. I don't care enough to look that up for you though... go fetch.

Don't know about others, and I don't live in BC, but I used those bags for a lot of things. Everything from paint rollers to stuffing for outdoor archery targets, I'd post a list but it might overtax Herb's attention span. Now I buy the ones I need and they seem thicker to me, maybe twice as thick (not sure). Anyway, I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that my "plastic bag footprint" has doubled. On the plus side, I do use a lot of cast off shrink wrap for targets now. And that's another thing BTW, ask any forklift operator about the amount of shrink-wrap used, it's just behind those double doors and out of sight.... shhhhh

Your “simple analogy” argues against you. But, since you obviously intended it as ridicule, and since you freely admit to being a bigger sh&t magnet than I thought, let’s run with it. Given the fact that 60 dogs are using your deck as a toilet, I’d opine from the get go that you probably have trouble getting along with your neighbours. If you talk to them the way you talk to people here (on this forum) then I’m not surprised by the condition of your porch. In fact, I confidently predict it will spread to your driveway. It sounds like the neighbours trained their dogs to respond in a way you can relate to… in other words, there might be a lesson here. If you go out once a week (shovel in hand) to clean up the mess it should become glaringly obvious that your own dog’s contribution is so insignificant that any effort spent training him would be better spent on the bigger issue here… mitigating the effect of those 60 other dogs. Should you choose to focus only on your dog’s contribution and ignore options clearly available to you, then dog sh&t will continue to accumulate. And, if you opt for the standard liberal mitigation strategy (analogous to the Jasper forestry management model BTW) of doing nothing, in 10 years time you won’t be able to get out of your house. Since you’re fond of analogies, I’d submit that watching the sh&tfest taking place on your deck is like watching massive piles of tinder dry fuel accumulate for years (and years) without addressing the issue directly. Instead of remedying the situation, you spank your own dog and ridicule those who identify the real issue, offer reasonable mitigation strategies and warn against the dangers of doing nothing. Here’s the difference… if I were you, I’d clean up the mess, scrub the deck with deck cleaner, sand it down to bare wood, apply a semi transparent oil stain to protect it, and build a fence around the property to keep the dogs out. I’d also make an effort to repair my reputation with the neighbours. If you make that effort, I think you’ll see better results than beating your own dog and petitioning pet food companies to add more protein (less fillers) to their products in a coordinated effort to reduce turd sizes. Ya, exactly the sort of glib nonsense I’m talking about. In the liberal version - it’s a global regulatory scheme to modify protein levels in dogfood leading to reduced turd sizes. It will will take years to have any effect on the global dog population and it won’t matter to your deck anyway. At best, it’s simply an excuse for inaction and recipe for eventual structural failure of the deck itself. Sort of like Jasper, except with dog sh&t instead of wild fires.

Are you implying that addressing excessive fuel loading (with tinder dry wood over the course of many years) is somehow rendered "meaningless" because of climate change? If you blame an ice storm on climate change would you still want the roads salted? What I'm suggesting here is that if you plan to wait for Herb to browbeat the deniers into submission you're likely to find yourself slip sliding away. Any action plan on emissions requires global cooperation on a massive scale, most here can't even discuss the issue politely... want wait for them or do you want to salt the road? Even if climate change wasn't an issue forestry management would be.... and Jasper still would have burned without it. I'll have to leave you to it, the next few days are nice here and i'll be out on the land... I sure which more people said that.

Nice, inspiring even... full marks for leading change, paving the road ahead, swaying opinions and gaining cooperation. Those 2 degrees C would have made all the difference in Jasper. So, while we wait for your wisdom to resonate with voters and inspire the world to address climatology at a global level, I hope we're capable of learning something about forestry management, fuel loading and the cost of inattention / inaction on contributory cause factors well within our sphere of influence. It's either that or we join you in the tree throwing our own sh&t at random passersby as we wait for that 0.2 reduction in our 1.4% (global emissions contribution) to finally kick in. And, if that doesn't work, we'll just scream "I told ya so" as we collectively watch the supply of bananas dwindle. .

Seems to me that mitigation efforts are all you (we and us) have to work with here. Why would a climate activist (believer, alarmist, or what ever) not advocate for mitigating the effects of an acknowledged threat? You would think they'd be front and centre demanding it. I wouldn't call the balance precarious either, it was obvious, glaring even... a big hungry beast granted full parole and left unchained to bide its time while awaiting the right conditions to pounce. Forestry management is no fairy tale but the lack of it can certainly set the scene of an award winning horror show. Identifying and acknowledging the presence of known hazards without having a contingency plan to mitigate them is the very definition of negligence in most professional endeavours. It certainly is in aviation anyway, most people would demand that effort and in its absence would sue if it contributed to an incident/accident. Being unable to do everything isn't an excuse for doing nothing either... yet nothing is exactly what happened there. It was a slow motion train wreck, warnings, predictions and threat assessments fell on deaf ears and one things for sure, if I were the owner of those negligent ears I'd blame my lack of common dog and situational awareness on climate change too.

Well, you may be right about that. The secular religious aspect of this and the polarization it produces is on full display here and it creates an impenetrable barrier to getting things done. Then again, a simple thing like an afternoon's outing by horseback is what tends to generate questions instead of pronouncements, and most of those questions start with "wait a minute now..." Maybe we need more questions and less pronouncements... I'll even go first: " with regard to the fire in Jasper, the long lead up to it, and the (I say criminal) lack of management, wtf did you think was going to happen?" Risk can only be mitigated with things that are under your control (like forestry management), the rest is a diversion, or more accurately perhaps an excuse for inaction. Action costs, it might be in money, blood, sweat, time or what ever but it costs... and the return (at least in this case) is measured in something that didn't happen. A tough sell I think, fairy tales are easier. Put another way, Canada's contribution to global emissions is about 1.4%. We could shutdown everything (and I mean everything), shiver in the dark, starve and produce zero emissions; what effect would that have had on the Jasper fire in the absence of forestry management? The answer is nothing. Not a thing.

Yes, but it only fools people who aren't out on the land. Like many endeavours, having eyes to see, ears to hear, average intelligence plus the time and inclination to get er done is all that you need. Do it and in short order you'll have questions; mostly prefixed with"wait a minute now." Don't do it and you'll be just another expert commentator with lots of answers, and we already have enough of those folks.

I would have thought those who consider global warming causal to be the biggest proponents of good forestry management practices. Acknowledging a heightened threat from an clearly identifiable source whilst failing to take reasonable (and obvious) mitigation efforts seems worse than denying the threats existence in the first place. Throw in the combined effects of prevailing winds, valley orientation, fuel loading, average (predictable) annual weather patterns and common sense and you'd think climate change deniers and climate change activists would be singing from the same mitigation hymnbook. Workable threat assessments are grounded in reality, and reality doesn't care which of the cults you belong to.

The orientation of valleys vs prevailing winds and fuel loading is huge part of the situation estimate as well (Mommy, why are the trees red?). Forestry management may be a science but common sense has merit as well. People who are routinely "out on the land" will often tell you that they're surprised there aren't more forrest fires. In many cases, like Jasper, the threat assessment comes easy and the after action question is WTF did you think was going to happen? Attributing it all to global warming is a deflection that provides an easy out and a shoulder shrug instead of accountability and lessons learned. That's not to say it doesn't exist either, but combine it with management that doesn't exist and responsibility never acknowledged or assumed and you have a big dog with sharp teeth waiting for the right conditions to bite your a$$. Land doesn't need to be managed... unless you want to live there.

Agreed, a nonsense answer that only promotes more nonsense from people who slobber nonsense on their shirts. I've been dragging contrails across the sky in military and commercial aircraft for over 3 decades. No holding tanks, no chemicals and NO BLOODY ROOM FOR THEM either. The weight penalty alone would be prohibitive. Cloud seeding is a different animal. In short it's used to mitigate severe weather like damaging hail or to enhance precipitation for agricultural purposes by injecting condensation nuclei. The jury is out on its effectiveness and typically silver iodide or potassium iodide is used. The jury is also out on the toxicity effects... especially the effect of any introduced salts on agricultural land. Never done it, that's the extent of my knowledge on the subject and I don't care enough to look it up. At first I thought this was simply a pleasant conversation about contrails... like most of the exchanges here it appears I was wrong. Given that I have but two words for the resident nasties. Happy Thanksgiving. Actually that wasn't it... just sounds better than what I had in mind.

A statement: I do believe Israel has a right to exist and I think most Muslims do as well. A question: Why would Muslims build their Dome of the Rock on top of the Jews most holy site? An answer: Same reason someone wold carve a mountain into ugly Presidents faces. To belittle what came before them. And... an appropriate analogy:

Well done, First glimmer of anything close to being viable lyrics I've seen here... needs work but it's worthy of getting the guitar out and playing around with. Regardless of context or intention, head and shoulders over normal forum offerings OK, say something profound Herb; smugly arrogant would work too... I need a chorus.

Either the aircraft are going to different places or they're wasting a lot of valuable chemicals in a small patch of sky. If the latter, it must have been coordinated by progressives... intersectionality and all that. Here's the cockpit view. RVSM is reduced vertical separation minima

You can sometimes see the same effect with the car in front of you on a cold day. In the arctic, when the conditions are just right, an engine start will put enough moisture into the air to create a thick blanket of ice fog almost instantaneously... it's a relatively rare thing but pretty cool to see. Depending on conditions, contrails can last anywhere from minutes to extended periods... they can even produce an entire layer of Cirrus cloud if conditions are right. Environmentally, there is some debate about them because they tend to capture more radiation from below than they reflect from above... thus creating a net increase in heat retention and contributing to global warming as a result of it.

Contrail altitudes can easily be calculated. As you might expect, for tactical missions the estimates are routinely included in the meteorological briefing pack... so they can be avoided. Why would any sensible mission commander on a "secret deployment mission" fly at those altitudes? Here's where the conspiracy falls apart, next time you see multiple contrails stretching from horizon to horizon take a moment and consider the size of the chemical holding tanks that would be required for a trans continental/trans oceanic flight. Imagine the number of passengers and the amount of luggage that would have to stay on the ground because of it... it would be breathtaking. Ticket prices would be off the charts to compensate for the massive reduction in available seat miles. It's not just airplanes BTW, with the right environmental conditions, vapour trails can even be seen behind bullets. In this case it's caused by pressure changes around the bullet. rather than the release of water vapour and condensation nuclei from the engines. Viewed with a spotter scope the effect is more impressive than that shown above. Dew point is the temperature to which unsaturated air needs to be cooled (at a constant pressure) to become saturated. Increased pressure raises temperature and decreased pressure reduces it. Both factors come into play with a bullet in flight in the same manner as with visible wing vortices, especially with landing aircraft in slow speed high lift configurations when the temp/moisture content of the air is just right. Then again, maybe Herb is right and I'm just annoyed by basic physics... shhhhhh

What chemicals were in this pot?

The conversation I referenced was basically an acknowledgement that each of the dots was (or would be) a heartfelt apology by a tearful Canadian Prime Minister. The general consensus being the results were easily anticipated and the actions that preceded the tearful apologies all begged the same question… that being: “WTF did you think was going to happen?” Sure, they differ in terms of damage done, to whom it was done, duration and overall effect, but the general idea was that sober reflection (prior to implementation) might have saved us from falling for the unhinged madness of “good idea fairies.” Residential schools operated by religious entities... ya, what could possibly go wrong there eh? Who'd a thunk? Safe supply (drugs for addicts) and the permanent mutilation of minor children were simply seen as fellow passengers on the same boat to Crazy Island. All dressed differently but with a common destination. You accidentally left out extreme left wing views now believed to be mainstream liberal ones. There’s been a polar shift under my feet to such an extent that I don’t even recognize the liberal party I used to vote for. The point of my original post here (the one you took exception to) was that good idea fairies can be dangerous because bad ideas usually have a common "WTF did you think was going to happen?" flavour to them in the after action report. I don't know this guys history but his "Bob on the FOB" memes were popular in Afghanistan and likely other theatres where stupid ideas have immediate consequences. Past sins won't be resolved on this forum but resolving to sin no more might be a good first step...