Quote:
Originally Posted by Cazador
I'm eager to see the finished product. I bet it's going to look great. It'll just be a bit heavier than you've gotten used to moving around.
|
Not really, had a 180 liter glass (just 4mm thick) terrarium once, that weighed as much as this one will. That one was a pain in the arse to move, just because of the thickness and the weight of the material.
This one will be much easier to handle. I just started thinking, that I migt not be able to get it into my car after all, the total height will be almost 59cm and I remember that my modified terrarium wouldn't fit as 60cm high.
Fortunately, the top won't be permanently attached, which will enable me to reduce its height to a mere 57cm.
Can't stop laughing at how this simple project got turned into an "adventure" again. Running out of smilies here.
Quote:
|
If I have anything negative to say about the scientific "establishment" it is that scientists are VERY cautious and deliberate and it usually takes a VERY long time with much, much, much repetition before establishing or changing a major theory. On such large issues, an elephant practically has to be sitting on your couch before the world agrees that something's amiss. I know that's part of what gives science its credibility, but on such an important issue, I think it's prudent to look at the preponderance of evidence and make decisions in a more timely manner. The CO2 issue isn't just about the levels of CO2... It's about the type of carbon isotope that comprises the CO2. Since the ratios are changing, and more of the stable type (C-12) is appearing in the atmosphere, it shows that fossil fuels (millions of years old) are the source that are diluting our atmospheric composition. It's not just that CO2 levels are rising, but the carbonic composition is changing as a result of the burning of fossil fuels. I tend to look very skeptically at the reports that "industry scientists" produce and often find glaring holes in them, as a result. Their shortcomings, of course, aren't what make the headlines because one has to understand the process in order to interpret the results.
|
I still don't find the atmospheric composition interesting outside the discussion of what the source is. The source is obvious.
The greenhouse effect theory revolves around the effect CO2 is presumed to have on different kinds of radiation, especially together with water vapor.
One thing that I admit might have made me a bit more skeptical, is the way non-scientist get involved. If I want to know ANYTHING, the last people I ask, are the media, politicians or the average joe. They have nothing to contribute, yet they act as if they do.