Odd sayings
- ScottFromWyoming - May 23, 2024 - 3:10pm
Climate Change
- R_P - May 23, 2024 - 2:48pm
RP Daily Trivia Challenge
- ScottFromWyoming - May 23, 2024 - 2:20pm
Things You Thought Today
- Manbird - May 23, 2024 - 1:39pm
Fascism In America
- R_P - May 23, 2024 - 1:23pm
Israel
- R_P - May 23, 2024 - 12:25pm
Wordle - daily game
- Steely_D - May 23, 2024 - 11:44am
NY Times Strands
- rgio - May 23, 2024 - 11:39am
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - May 23, 2024 - 11:02am
It's the economy stupid.
- R_P - May 23, 2024 - 10:57am
Nederland / The Netherlands
- R_P - May 23, 2024 - 10:03am
Music News
- Beaker - May 23, 2024 - 8:30am
Interviews with the artists
- Beaker - May 23, 2024 - 8:12am
NYTimes Connections
- ScottFromWyoming - May 23, 2024 - 7:24am
Radio Paradise Comments
- Coaxial - May 23, 2024 - 5:06am
Today in History
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 23, 2024 - 3:39am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 22, 2024 - 8:51pm
Science is bullsh*t
- GeneP59 - May 22, 2024 - 4:16pm
Maarjamaa
- oldviolin - May 22, 2024 - 3:32pm
Gotta Get Your Drink On
- ScottFromWyoming - May 22, 2024 - 3:25pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- jarro - May 22, 2024 - 11:19am
New Music
- R_P - May 22, 2024 - 9:18am
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful
- Isabeau - May 22, 2024 - 7:56am
Trump
- rgio - May 22, 2024 - 4:44am
Coffee
- haresfur - May 22, 2024 - 12:12am
Rock mix sound quality below Main and Mellow?
- theirongiant - May 21, 2024 - 2:23pm
Most played: what's the range? Last 30 days? 90?
- theirongiant - May 21, 2024 - 2:20pm
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- oldviolin - May 21, 2024 - 11:59am
Name My Band
- Isabeau - May 21, 2024 - 10:27am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- Isabeau - May 20, 2024 - 2:16pm
What Did You See Today?
- Steely_D - May 20, 2024 - 1:24pm
Baseball, anyone?
- ScottFromWyoming - May 20, 2024 - 12:00pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- ColdMiser - May 20, 2024 - 7:50am
Shawn Phillips
- Isabeau - May 20, 2024 - 6:20am
The Corporation
- Red_Dragon - May 20, 2024 - 5:08am
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests
- GeneP59 - May 19, 2024 - 4:08pm
What can you hear right now?
- GeneP59 - May 19, 2024 - 4:07pm
China
- Isabeau - May 19, 2024 - 2:22pm
What Makes You Laugh?
- Isabeau - May 19, 2024 - 2:18pm
TV shows you watch
- Steely_D - May 19, 2024 - 1:13am
Music library
- nightdrive - May 18, 2024 - 1:28pm
The Obituary Page
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 18, 2024 - 4:18am
Paul McCartney
- miamizsun - May 18, 2024 - 4:06am
Virginia News
- Steely_D - May 18, 2024 - 2:51am
Gnomad here. Who farking deleted my thread?
- Red_Dragon - May 17, 2024 - 5:59pm
The Dragons' Roost
- triskele - May 17, 2024 - 4:04pm
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - May 17, 2024 - 1:43pm
DIY
- black321 - May 17, 2024 - 9:16am
Other Medical Stuff
- kurtster - May 16, 2024 - 10:00pm
Your Local News
- Proclivities - May 16, 2024 - 12:51pm
Alexa Show
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 12:15pm
Joe Biden
- Steely_D - May 16, 2024 - 1:02am
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc.
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2024 - 4:13pm
how do you feel right now?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2024 - 4:10pm
What the hell OV?
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 12:38pm
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:50am
NASA & other news from space
- Beaker - May 15, 2024 - 9:29am
Artificial Intelligence
- thisbody - May 15, 2024 - 8:25am
Human Rights (Can Science Point The Way)
- miamizsun - May 15, 2024 - 5:50am
Play the Blues
- Steely_D - May 15, 2024 - 1:50am
Animal Resistance
- R_P - May 14, 2024 - 6:37pm
2024 Elections!
- R_P - May 14, 2024 - 6:00pm
punk? hip-hop? metal? noise? garage?
- thisbody - May 14, 2024 - 1:27pm
Social Media Are Changing Everything
- Red_Dragon - May 14, 2024 - 8:08am
Internet connection
- ai63 - May 14, 2024 - 7:53am
Congress
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 8:22pm
Ukraine
- R_P - May 13, 2024 - 5:50pm
What The Hell Buddy?
- oldviolin - May 13, 2024 - 1:25pm
Surfing!
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 13, 2024 - 1:21pm
Bad Poetry
- oldviolin - May 13, 2024 - 11:38am
See This Film
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 8:35am
Podcast recommendations???
- ColdMiser - May 13, 2024 - 7:50am
News of the Weird
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 5:05am
Those Lovable Policemen
- R_P - May 12, 2024 - 11:31am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- kurtster - May 12, 2024 - 9:16am
|
Index »
Radio Paradise/General »
About RP »
Fires
|
Page: 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 16, 2020 - 5:07pm |
|
miamizsun wrote:interesting article regarding the fires... This is a story about frustration, about watching the West burn when you fully understand why itâs burning â and understand why it did not need to be this bad. The pattern is a form of insanity: We keep doing overzealous fire suppression across California landscapes where the fire poses little risk to people and structures. As a result, wildland fuels keep building up. At the same time, the climate grows hotter and drier. Then, boom: the inevitable. The wind blows down a power line, or lightning strikes dry grass, and an inferno ensues. This week weâve seen both the second- and third-largest fires in California history. âThe fire community, the progressives, are almost in a state of panic,â Ingalsbee said. Thereâs only one solution, the one we know yet still avoid. âWe need to get good fire on the ground and whittle down some of that fuel load.â Yes, thereâs been talk across the U.S. Forest Service and California state agencies about doing more prescribed burns and managed burns. The point of that âgood fireâ would be to create a black-and-green checkerboard across the state. The black burned parcels would then provide a series of dampers and dead ends to keep the fire intensity lower when flames spark in hot, dry conditions, as they did this past week. But weâve had far too little âgood fire,â as the Cassandras call it. Too little purposeful, healthy fire. Too few acres intentionally burned or corralled by certified âburn bossesâ (yes, thatâs the official term in the California Resources Code) to keep communities safe in weeks like this. Academics believe that between 4.4 million and 11.8 million acres burned each year in prehistoric California. Between 1982 and 1998, Californiaâs agency land managers burned, on average, about 30,000 acres a year. Between 1999 and 2017, that number dropped to an annual 13,000 acres. The state passed a few new laws in 2018 designed to facilitate more intentional burning. But few are optimistic this, alone, will lead to significant change. We live with a deathly backlog. In February 2020, Nature Sustainability published this terrifying conclusion: California would need to burn 20 million acres â an area about the size of Maine â to restabilize in terms of fire. We have a really big program of fuel reduction burns but it is basically impossible to keep up. And you really screw up the ecology if you burn everything in an area at once - you have to leave islands unburnt to regenerate the area. The aboriginal people knew that - they have done controlled burns for about 50,000 years. Then the big problem is that the controlled burn season is getting shorter and the fire danger season longer.
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 16, 2020 - 6:07am |
|
cc_rider wrote:Here in Bastrop County, the authorities regularly do 'controlled burns' to manage the brush. The worst fire, in 2011, came during a severe drought - no outdoor burning, period - and unusually high winds. Caused by a tree or trees falling on a power line - Asplundh recently paid $20 million+ to settle a lawsuit.
BUT, property owners in CA and OR have voted against fire mitigation practices over and over again. And much of the land on fire now is Federally-owned. Hmmm... c. well the causes are multiple some easier to control than others education might be the first place to start other short term "easy fixes" would obviously be prudent land management techniques maybe grid/transmission design (solar and smr integration where it would make sense) lots of challenges need to be re-thought get political roadblocks out of the way
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 15, 2020 - 12:29pm |
|
miamizsun wrote:interesting article regarding the fires... Partly because there are houses dotting most of those 5million acres they would need to burn. ==== NB the BLM has done prescribed burns forever and/but recent headlines or Facebook Russians have conflated Bureau of Land Management with Black Lives Matter and used "BLM sets fire" as some sort of condemnation of something or other.
|
|
cc_rider
Location: Bastrop Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 15, 2020 - 8:04am |
|
miamizsun wrote:interesting article regarding the fires... This is a story about frustration, about watching the West burn when you fully understand why itâs burning â and understand why it did not need to be this bad. The pattern is a form of insanity: We keep doing overzealous fire suppression across California landscapes where the fire poses little risk to people and structures. As a result, wildland fuels keep building up. At the same time, the climate grows hotter and drier. Then, boom: the inevitable. The wind blows down a power line, or lightning strikes dry grass, and an inferno ensues. This week weâve seen both the second- and third-largest fires in California history. âThe fire community, the progressives, are almost in a state of panic,â Ingalsbee said. Thereâs only one solution, the one we know yet still avoid. âWe need to get good fire on the ground and whittle down some of that fuel load.â Yes, thereâs been talk across the U.S. Forest Service and California state agencies about doing more prescribed burns and managed burns. The point of that âgood fireâ would be to create a black-and-green checkerboard across the state. The black burned parcels would then provide a series of dampers and dead ends to keep the fire intensity lower when flames spark in hot, dry conditions, as they did this past week. But weâve had far too little âgood fire,â as the Cassandras call it. Too little purposeful, healthy fire. Too few acres intentionally burned or corralled by certified âburn bossesâ (yes, thatâs the official term in the California Resources Code) to keep communities safe in weeks like this. Academics believe that between 4.4 million and 11.8 million acres burned each year in prehistoric California. Between 1982 and 1998, Californiaâs agency land managers burned, on average, about 30,000 acres a year. Between 1999 and 2017, that number dropped to an annual 13,000 acres. The state passed a few new laws in 2018 designed to facilitate more intentional burning. But few are optimistic this, alone, will lead to significant change. We live with a deathly backlog. In February 2020, Nature Sustainability published this terrifying conclusion: California would need to burn 20 million acres â an area about the size of Maine â to restabilize in terms of fire. Here in Bastrop County, the authorities regularly do 'controlled burns' to manage the brush. The worst fire, in 2011, came during a severe drought - no outdoor burning, period - and unusually high winds. Caused by a tree or trees falling on a power line - Asplundh recently paid $20 million+ to settle a lawsuit. BUT, property owners in CA and OR have voted against fire mitigation practices over and over again. And much of the land on fire now is Federally-owned. Hmmm... c.
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 12, 2020 - 12:25pm |
|
interesting article regarding the fires... This is a story about frustration, about watching the West burn when you fully understand why it’s burning — and understand why it did not need to be this bad. The pattern is a form of insanity: We keep doing overzealous fire suppression across California landscapes where the fire poses little risk to people and structures. As a result, wildland fuels keep building up. At the same time, the climate grows hotter and drier. Then, boom: the inevitable. The wind blows down a power line, or lightning strikes dry grass, and an inferno ensues. This week we’ve seen both the second- and third-largest fires in California history. “The fire community, the progressives, are almost in a state of panic,” Ingalsbee said. There’s only one solution, the one we know yet still avoid. “We need to get good fire on the ground and whittle down some of that fuel load.”
Yes, there’s been talk across the U.S. Forest Service and California state agencies about doing more prescribed burns and managed burns. The point of that “good fire” would be to create a black-and-green checkerboard across the state. The black burned parcels would then provide a series of dampers and dead ends to keep the fire intensity lower when flames spark in hot, dry conditions, as they did this past week. But we’ve had far too little “good fire,” as the Cassandras call it. Too little purposeful, healthy fire. Too few acres intentionally burned or corralled by certified “burn bosses” (yes, that’s the official term in the California Resources Code) to keep communities safe in weeks like this. Academics believe that between 4.4 million and 11.8 million acres burned each year in prehistoric California. Between 1982 and 1998, California’s agency land managers burned, on average, about 30,000 acres a year. Between 1999 and 2017, that number dropped to an annual 13,000 acres. The state passed a few new laws in 2018 designed to facilitate more intentional burning. But few are optimistic this, alone, will lead to significant change. We live with a deathly backlog. In February 2020, Nature Sustainability published this terrifying conclusion: California would need to burn 20 million acres — an area about the size of Maine — to restabilize in terms of fire.
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 10, 2020 - 12:07am |
|
Manbird wrote: miamizsun wrote: i'm seeing a sw wind with the main body of flames to the ne of you
Yeah we're almost surrounded - all ablaze but the West and South. But the wind has really died down and, locally, we have about 33% humidity overnight. I'm counting on them putting what few resources they have on saving Oroville. Dozers, air support, boots on the ground. We're in the foothills, not in the town proper but I still think our little pocket neighborhood will be spared. Scary. Hoping for the best.
|
|
Manbird
Location: La Villa Toscana Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:47pm |
|
miamizsun wrote: i'm seeing a sw wind with the main body of flames to the ne of you
Yeah we're almost surrounded - all ablaze but the West and South. But the wind has really died down and, locally, we have about 33% humidity overnight. I'm counting on them putting what few resources they have on saving Oroville. Dozers, air support, boots on the ground. We're in the foothills, not in the town proper but I still think our little pocket neighborhood will be spared.
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:40pm |
|
Manbird wrote: miamizsun wrote:yo manbird make sure you've got your bug out gear ready
essential stuff
seriously It's tough with all the animals. I can't figure out how to transport all the birds let alone hawks (including a bunch of falconry gear, perches, frozen quail, etc) and a few cats. Plus an extremely autistic roommate. I don't know what hell is going on. Fortunately the weather is favoring us and they haven't cut our power. Tomorrow I have to go out of town. I hope they let me back in. It's a bleedin' nightmare... but it will be OK. i'm seeing a sw wind with the main body of flames to the ne of you i hope it all works out
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:38pm |
|
Coaxial wrote: yeah the wind is not his friend (if i'm reading the map correctly)
|
|
oldviolin
Location: esse quam videri Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:36pm |
|
Manbird wrote: miamizsun wrote:yo manbird make sure you've got your bug out gear ready
essential stuff
seriously It's tough with all the animals. I can't figure out how to transport all the birds let alone hawks (including a bunch of falconry gear, perches, frozen quail, etc) and a few cats. Plus an extremely autistic roommate. I don't know what hell is going on. Fortunately the weather is favoring us and they haven't cut our power. Tomorrow I have to go out of town. I hope they let me back in. It's a bleedin' nightmare... but it will be OK.
|
|
Manbird
Location: La Villa Toscana Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:35pm |
|
miamizsun wrote:yo manbird make sure you've got your bug out gear ready
essential stuff
seriously It's tough with all the animals. I can't figure out how to transport all the birds let alone hawks (including a bunch of falconry gear, perches, frozen quail, etc) and a few cats. Plus an extremely autistic roommate. I don't know what hell is going on. Fortunately the weather is favoring us and they haven't cut our power. Tomorrow I have to go out of town. I hope they let me back in. It's a bleedin' nightmare... but it will be OK.
|
|
Coaxial
Location: Comfortably numb in So Texas Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:33pm |
|
miamizsun wrote:yo manbird make sure you've got your bug out gear ready
essential stuff
seriously
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 9, 2020 - 7:04pm |
|
yo manbird make sure you've got your bug out gear ready
essential stuff
seriously
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 16, 2019 - 11:40pm |
|
kurtster wrote: haresfur wrote:"We can measure the energy we get from the sun, and it does have a natural variability. But itâs very small, and it has not shown any long-term trend over the past century, when we have seen this dramatic warming. "It is clearly not one of the factors that has caused this warming." You are obviously not reading what I have been posting. I have only been talking about the earth's magnetic field, not the sun's. No worries though. There is no point to move forward with as you are 100% sure that CO² is the only factor responsible for both Global Warming and Climate Change and is 100% settled science.Your mind is made up and totally closed to any possibility of other factors that could have an influence. So if we do lower the amount of CO² in the earth's atmosphere we must watch out for the danger of triggering an ice age, which would be much more devastating than warming. And another thingI didn't say anything about being 100% sure that CO2 is the only factor responsible for climate change. I did say that for any of your claims to be worth considering, you need to come up with a physical mechanism that would link the earth's magnetic field motion to climate effects before it is worth considering as a possible factor. Otherwise it is just throwing stuff against the wall hoping something sticks. Aside from a mechanism, it would also have to correlate with the temporal trends and be backed up by measurements or models. And yes, there are other factors such as methane and sulfur hexafluoride, but they are not as important. Methane is particularly troubling though, because the release from melting permafrost is going to have a large effect on atmospheric concentrations.
|
|
islander
Location: West coast somewhere Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 16, 2019 - 7:59am |
|
kurtster wrote:
Your unsolicited interjections into ongoing conversations always raise the level of discourse. By the way, degrees do not measure linear distance. Just saying ...
You're really good at sarcasm.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2019 - 8:17pm |
|
islander wrote: haresfur wrote: kurtster wrote: haresfur wrote:"We can measure the energy we get from the sun, and it does have a natural variability. But itâs very small, and it has not shown any long-term trend over the past century, when we have seen this dramatic warming. "It is clearly not one of the factors that has caused this warming." You are obviously not reading what I have been posting. I have only been talking about the earth's magnetic field, not the sun's. No worries though. There is no point to move forward with as you are 100% sure that CO² is the only factor responsible for both Global Warming and Climate Change and is 100% settled science. Your mind is made up and totally closed to any possibility of other factors that could have an influence. So if we do lower the amount of CO² in the earth's atmosphere we must watch out for the danger of triggering an ice age, which would be much more devastating than warming. Just pointing out that you aren't the only one coming up with random bizarre concepts that have no bearing on reality. You say the earth's magnetic field has been changing but there is no scientific mechanism which relates the changes to climate. The timescale isn't even the same with the magnetic pole motion only increasing rapidly in the past few years. My point, as I said below, which you apparently didn't read - you need to come up with a mechanism where greenhouse gases are not responsible given the scientific understanding of how and why they act to warm the planet. The thought that stopping adding to the CO2 released to the atmosphere will spin us into an ice age is pretty hilarious. Maybe you should read up on global geochemical cycles and residence times. Tell you what, leave the hydrocarbons in the ground and if, in a few hundred years, the world, starts heading into an ice age, feel free to start burning them again. On the other hand your ice age idea does seem to indicate that you admit that greenhouse gases are causing significant global climate change. So I suppose that's a start. islander wrote:So Haresfur is going to fly into a rage (We can speculate why, but it's really impossible to tell) and search you out. He's going to lash you to a chair and then proceed to use his amazing ambidextrous skills and two sets of garden sheers to cut off the end of your fingernail one one hand, and your whole finger on the other hand. We are all outside the door and ready to burst in and stop him. But since he has such skill we can probably only grab one of his arms. Would you prefer we stop the fingernail side, or the finger side? They are pretty much the same, just different by a matter of degrees right? Maybe we should just debate it for a while, since something is probably going to happen anyway.
and then you wrote:
Cut him at the knuckle, it's a fair compromise. Your unsolicited interjections into ongoing conversations always raise the level of discourse. By the way, degrees do not measure linear distance. Just saying ...
|
|
islander
Location: West coast somewhere Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2019 - 9:07pm |
|
haresfur wrote: kurtster wrote: haresfur wrote:"We can measure the energy we get from the sun, and it does have a natural variability. But itâs very small, and it has not shown any long-term trend over the past century, when we have seen this dramatic warming. "It is clearly not one of the factors that has caused this warming." You are obviously not reading what I have been posting. I have only been talking about the earth's magnetic field, not the sun's. No worries though. There is no point to move forward with as you are 100% sure that CO² is the only factor responsible for both Global Warming and Climate Change and is 100% settled science. Your mind is made up and totally closed to any possibility of other factors that could have an influence. So if we do lower the amount of CO² in the earth's atmosphere we must watch out for the danger of triggering an ice age, which would be much more devastating than warming. Just pointing out that you aren't the only one coming up with random bizarre concepts that have no bearing on reality. You say the earth's magnetic field has been changing but there is no scientific mechanism which relates the changes to climate. The timescale isn't even the same with the magnetic pole motion only increasing rapidly in the past few years. My point, as I said below, which you apparently didn't read - you need to come up with a mechanism where greenhouse gases are not responsible given the scientific understanding of how and why they act to warm the planet. The thought that stopping adding to the CO2 released to the atmosphere will spin us into an ice age is pretty hilarious. Maybe you should read up on global geochemical cycles and residence times. Tell you what, leave the hydrocarbons in the ground and if, in a few hundred years, the world, starts heading into an ice age, feel free to start burning them again. On the other hand your ice age idea does seem to indicate that you admit that greenhouse gases are causing significant global climate change. So I suppose that's a start. Cut him at the knuckle, it's a fair compromise.
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2019 - 8:49pm |
|
kurtster wrote: haresfur wrote:"We can measure the energy we get from the sun, and it does have a natural variability. But itâs very small, and it has not shown any long-term trend over the past century, when we have seen this dramatic warming. "It is clearly not one of the factors that has caused this warming." You are obviously not reading what I have been posting. I have only been talking about the earth's magnetic field, not the sun's. No worries though. There is no point to move forward with as you are 100% sure that CO² is the only factor responsible for both Global Warming and Climate Change and is 100% settled science. Your mind is made up and totally closed to any possibility of other factors that could have an influence. So if we do lower the amount of CO² in the earth's atmosphere we must watch out for the danger of triggering an ice age, which would be much more devastating than warming. Just pointing out that you aren't the only one coming up with random bizarre concepts that have no bearing on reality. You say the earth's magnetic field has been changing but there is no scientific mechanism which relates the changes to climate. The timescale isn't even the same with the magnetic pole motion only increasing rapidly in the past few years. My point, as I said below, which you apparently didn't read - you need to come up with a mechanism where greenhouse gases are not responsible given the scientific understanding of how and why they act to warm the planet. The thought that stopping adding to the CO2 released to the atmosphere will spin us into an ice age is pretty hilarious. Maybe you should read up on global geochemical cycles and residence times. Tell you what, leave the hydrocarbons in the ground and if, in a few hundred years, the world, starts heading into an ice age, feel free to start burning them again. On the other hand your ice age idea does seem to indicate that you admit that greenhouse gases are causing significant global climate change. So I suppose that's a start.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2019 - 4:46pm |
|
islander wrote:So Haresfur is going to fly into a rage (We can speculate why, but it's really impossible to tell) and search you out. He's going to lash you to a chair and then proceed to use his amazing ambidextrous skills and two sets of garden sheers to cut off the end of your fingernail one one hand, and your whole finger on the other hand. We are all outside the door and ready to burst in and stop him. But since he has such skill we can probably only grab one of his arms. Would you prefer we stop the fingernail side, or the finger side? They are pretty much the same, just different by a matter of degrees right? Maybe we should just debate it for a while, since something is probably going to happen anyway. You need better drugs. .
|
|
|