| |
G4EBT > FUEL 05.03.08 23:31l 170 Lines 6001 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 868158G4EBT
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Fuel bulls to continue?
Path: DB0FHN<DB0MRW<OK0PPL<DB0RES<F5GOV<ON4HU<ON0BEL<GB7FCR
Sent: 080305/2036Z @:GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU #:63800 [Blackpool] FBB-7.03a $:868158G4
From: G4EBT@GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU
To : FUEL@WW
Barry, VK2AAB wrote:-
>Some one has complained (mildly) about the fuel bulletins that I send
>out.
That doesn't mean their complaint are valid.
They can't be valid - bulls are self-selected.
What are they complaining about?
You aren't Coco the Clown - you don't owe them a duty to keep them amused.
If you write a bull headed "Peak Oil" it's obvious what the topic is.
Packet isn't a monotopic forum, and that's one of its strengths,
which sets it apart from almost any other forum.
The broad extent of topics on packet is self evident. In my case, over
the last 15 years I've sent out bulletins on well over 700 topics.
However, the range of topics can be a mixed blessing as lots of people
have no interest in many of the topics. Hence, many bulls go un-read.
This is in stark contrast to monotopic forums on internet.
To give an example, I'm a member of the UK Vintage Radio Forum.
It covers vintage radio including military and amateur, TVs, and test
equipment. Equipment, test gear and components are offered for sale or
wanted ads placed, technical advice can be sought and given, circuits
obtained, ideas shared, and latest projects discussed, and nes of events
such as auctions and fairs.
To date there are 15,579 threads on that forum, 125,092 postings, 4,635
members, of whom 1,313 are active members who post messages (rather than
just lurk).
It's a lively well moderated forum with a complete absence of the
silliness on packet. No posts go unremarked, and when you enter the forum
you know what it's about - UK radios etc.
But that's it.
There's no straying off topic, and no small talk.
Same goes for the G-QRP Group.
Put a message out on there about a computer virus or some such thing,
and the sky will fall in on you, and forget the small talk and banter.
There are internet newsgroups on every topic under the sun, but again,
they're monotopic. Space, weather, trains, music, history, climate
change...whatever.
Packet has all these and countless more rolled into one.
But however broad our range of interests, much of what appears on packet
will have limited appeal. The more serious the topic, the narrower will
be the appeal, be it Peak Oil or any other topic.
2k is roughly one A4 page.
It's fairly evident that bulls much longer than 2 - 3k are a turn off for
many. But you can't do justice to a complex topic such as peak oil in a
few throwaway lines, so only those who are truly interested will download
a 6k+ bull, let alone a 30k bull.
I write about topics which interest me and post them for the few who might
share that interest. I'd earnestly suggest you or anyone else do likewise
and pay no heed to how many might or might not read it.
You'll never know anyway.
I don't delude myself that there are people (except one perhaps) anxiously
awaiting my next 6k missive on some deadly dull topic such as Human
Rights.
As to the actual debate on peak oil (or climate change etc) there are
those such as Barry who approach this with an open mind and gather
information together from a range of sources before forming a view.
Then there are those who don't study these
issues and tend to fall into two camps:
1) "Something will turn up - it always does".
Often something has turned up.
Take global warming for example.
Evidence is that global warming is happening and that much of the cause
is man-made. To say that the problem is too big to tackle just isn't so.
In the 1980s alarm bells started ringing about the hole in the ozone layer
but it was thought impossible to fix because the causes were global and
the solution would need the co-operation of every country in the world.
Such co-operation was thought to be impossible.
But that time around the US took the lead, drafted a treaty, secured
worldwide agreement upon it and began to eliminate CFCs which were
considered the major cause.
In 1988 the US was pumping 300,000 tons of CFC into the atmosphere. By
1996 this had dropped to almost nothing. China went from 75,000 tons in
1986 to almost nothing by 1992.
It's defeatist to say that it's impossible to get a consensus on action on
climate change. It's happening already.
2) "I'm too shrewd to be taken in by this nonsense".
You see this with climate change doubters.
They'll believe in UFOs and the virgin birth, but not global warming.
The University of California reviewed all the expert scientific studies of
global warming for the ten years to 2006, and when they looked at a large
random sample didn't find a single one that disagreed with the mainstream
view.
928 peer reviewed articles have been published over the ten years to 2006.
Of those, not a single one doubted the causes of climate change, yet big
businesses don't want to control their global warming pollution, so they
apply pressure to governments to keep up "business as usual".
These self-interest groups mount campaigns to discredit the evidence.
They say jobs will be lost, votes will be lost, the economy will suffer.
The extent of influence of such self-interest groups shouldn't be
under-estimated. Of 3,543 articles by the popular press over the
last 14 years, 53% doubted the cause of global warming.
Many readers fall for this stuff.
Self-interest groups who sow these seeds of doubt often talk of putting
"both sides of the story". This gives a false impression that there are
in fact two credible sides as to whether global warming is happening and
what's causing it.
There aren't.
> However as someone said ; "If you are not panicking, then you don't
> understand the true situation!".
True, but doom-mongers go down too well with fogeydom on packet!
> Does anyone find them of interest ?
Yes - don't be discouraged Barry.
Be your own number one fan!
Often the critics don't write anything themselves.
Best wishes
David, G4EBT @ GB7FCR
Cottingham, East Yorkshire.
Message timed: 19:41 on 2008-Mar-05
Message sent using WinPack-Telnet V6.70
(Registered).
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
