So i am in the business of buying a good entry level road bike!?
i dont want to spend a lot of money as in 600 or more, i am new to road bikes, but have been riding mountain bikes forever. I am going to use the bike to travel around town especially on a consistent basis to work and college. So i have been looking around ebay but weary about buying used anything on ebay. So these are the 3 bikes i was looking at, which one would be the best overall value/performace/reliability? Windsor Wellington 3.0 - http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/windsor/wellington3.htm Tommosa Imola - http://www.rscycle.com/s.nl;jsessionid=0a010c451f43dd4193b4458b4a9aba26e07dd922a36c.e3eTaxiMa38Te34Pa38Ta38Tc310?it=A&id=23839&sc=11&category=110 Jamis Ventura - http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=110263980072 i am 5 foot 10 and have a stond over of about 31 and half inches. thank you for the help.
Cycling - 4 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Out of the three, I'd probably say the Jamis is the best for the price. edit - Hmm, I didn't notice the non-carbon fork...That'll be one harsh ride methinks :)
2 :
Hate to disagree with Tom but I'm drawn toward the Tommosa!! As an entry level you have a Triple chainset, (good for the hills) Also you have the advantage of a carbon fork!!!! (this will help dissipate 'road buzz') Being a superficial sort of chap (hey! aren't we all to some degree?) - It is Italian and looks classier!!! Just my opinion mate .
3 :
I've seen the reverse tons of time, a roadie going to mtb's. And they always say the same thing, "I don't want to spend too much..", or "I'm only going to ride it here and there..." What I always say is that you will never regret spending more money. You're going to get a much better bike that will be more enjoyable to ride. Did you see the Kestrel Evoke that they have on bikesdierct.com? That is the best deal on Earth right now! The frame alone is worth $900 more than the price of the complete bike! With that said I would go for the Tommosa out of the three bikes that you have the links to up there.
4 :
Tommosa would be better buy. The company is more reputable and it has better drivetrain than the Jamis
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Atheists: Will your own household Pets help to bring about a Biblical-style Apocalypse
Atheists: Will your own household Pets help to bring about a Biblical-style Apocalypse?
READ THE ARTICLE (Source: Yahoo's Home Page) AS IT IS BOTH INFORMATIVE & AMUSING. Polluting pets: the devastating impact of man's best friend PARIS (AFP) – Man's best friend could be one of the environment's worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle. But the revelation in the book "Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living" by New Zealanders Robert and Brenda Vale has angered pet owners who feel they are being singled out as troublemakers. The Vales, specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington, analysed popular brands of pet food and calculated that a medium-sized dog eats around 164 kilos (360 pounds) of meat and 95 kilos of cereal a year. Combine the land required to generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car. To confirm the results, the New Scientist magazine asked John Barrett at the Stockholm Environment Institute in York, Britain, to calculate eco-pawprints based on his own data. The results were essentially the same. "Owning a dog really is quite an extravagance, mainly because of the carbon footprint of meat," Barrett said. Other animals aren't much better for the environment, the Vales say. Cats have an eco-footprint of about 0.15 hectares, slightly less than driving a Volkswagen Golf for a year, while two hamsters equates to a plasma television and even the humble goldfish burns energy equivalent to two mobile telephones. But Reha Huttin, president of France's 30 Million Friends animal rights foundation says the human impact of eliminating pets would be equally devastating. "Pets are anti-depressants, they help us cope with stress, they are good for the elderly," Huttin told AFP. "Everyone should work out their own environmental impact. I should be allowed to say that I walk instead of using my car and that I don't eat meat, so why shouldn't I be allowed to have a little cat to alleviate my loneliness?" Sylvie Comont, proud owner of seven cats and two dogs -- the environmental equivalent of a small fleet of cars -- says defiantly, "Our animals give us so much that I don't feel like a polluter at all. "I think the love we have for our animals and what they contribute to our lives outweighs the environmental considerations. "I don't want a life without animals," she told AFP. And pets' environmental impact is not limited to their carbon footprint, as cats and dogs devastate wildlife, spread disease and pollute waterways, the Vales say. With a total 7.7 million cats in Britain, more than 188 million wild animals are hunted, killed and eaten by feline predators per year, or an average 25 birds, mammals and frogs per cat, according to figures in the New Scientist. Likewise, dogs decrease biodiversity in areas they are walked, while their faeces cause high bacterial levels in rivers and streams, making the water unsafe to drink, starving waterways of oxygen and killing aquatic life. And cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease. But despite the apocalyptic visions of domesticated animals' environmental impact, solutions exist, including reducing pets' protein-rich meat intake. "If pussy is scoffing 'Fancy Feast' -- or some other food made from choice cuts of meat -- then the relative impact is likely to be high," said Robert Vale. "If, on the other hand, the cat is fed on fish heads and other leftovers from the fishmonger, the impact will be lower." Other potential positive steps include avoiding walking your dog in wildlife-rich areas and keeping your cat indoors at night when it has a particular thirst for other, smaller animals' blood. As with buying a car, humans are also encouraged to take the environmental impact of their future possession/companion into account. But the best way of compensating for that paw or clawprint is to make sure your animal is dual purpose, the Vales urge. Get a hen, which offsets its impact by laying edible eggs, or a rabbit, prepared to make the ultimate environmental sacrifice by ending up on the dinner table. "Rabbits are good, provided you eat them," said Robert Vale.
Religion & Spirituality - 12 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
haha now the environmentalists want to take your precious pets? lol Nothing is safe from their guilt-driven tyrannical grasp!
2 :
According to the news lately, guess so.
3 :
no
4 :
ecological non-sense; politically motivated propaganda; the ocean puts off the most CO2; should we ban it as well....
5 :
Read about the future of this planet, in this verse. 2 Peter 3:10.
6 :
Catfish are genus Satans.
7 :
If we didn't eat cows, pigs, chickens etc. they would become extinct! Is that what fanatical environmentalists want, more animals becoming extinct? :P
8 :
LOLZ. And what happens after we get rid of all the pets and find ourselves in an even worse situation as they did in London with the plague. Which was caused because they got rid of all the cats and dogs that were killing all the rats. Robot Vale sounds like an animal hating moron. ;) Practicing Shaman... quantum physics rocks
9 :
Yes, I've heard this claim before. Too bad global warming is a load of crap. The Earth has been heating and cooling since it's genesis. Every generation there needs to be some crisis to "solve" to make politicians look good.
10 :
I could never cuddle up with a hen. I love my cats and doggy too much to even think of getting rid of them. There's always something out there for people to do research on. They should work on getting a cure for cancer, aids, or even the common cold. Let the animals have their homes with their loving families.
11 :
I'll tell my cat he's having fish heads for his dinner. That would certainly bring on doomsday
12 :
I'm vegan. My dogs are vegetarians. Only the cat eats meat because for him it is a biological imperative. We pick up our pet waste. Our cat litter is biodegradable. None of our pets are allowed to roam.
READ THE ARTICLE (Source: Yahoo's Home Page) AS IT IS BOTH INFORMATIVE & AMUSING. Polluting pets: the devastating impact of man's best friend PARIS (AFP) – Man's best friend could be one of the environment's worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle. But the revelation in the book "Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living" by New Zealanders Robert and Brenda Vale has angered pet owners who feel they are being singled out as troublemakers. The Vales, specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington, analysed popular brands of pet food and calculated that a medium-sized dog eats around 164 kilos (360 pounds) of meat and 95 kilos of cereal a year. Combine the land required to generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car. To confirm the results, the New Scientist magazine asked John Barrett at the Stockholm Environment Institute in York, Britain, to calculate eco-pawprints based on his own data. The results were essentially the same. "Owning a dog really is quite an extravagance, mainly because of the carbon footprint of meat," Barrett said. Other animals aren't much better for the environment, the Vales say. Cats have an eco-footprint of about 0.15 hectares, slightly less than driving a Volkswagen Golf for a year, while two hamsters equates to a plasma television and even the humble goldfish burns energy equivalent to two mobile telephones. But Reha Huttin, president of France's 30 Million Friends animal rights foundation says the human impact of eliminating pets would be equally devastating. "Pets are anti-depressants, they help us cope with stress, they are good for the elderly," Huttin told AFP. "Everyone should work out their own environmental impact. I should be allowed to say that I walk instead of using my car and that I don't eat meat, so why shouldn't I be allowed to have a little cat to alleviate my loneliness?" Sylvie Comont, proud owner of seven cats and two dogs -- the environmental equivalent of a small fleet of cars -- says defiantly, "Our animals give us so much that I don't feel like a polluter at all. "I think the love we have for our animals and what they contribute to our lives outweighs the environmental considerations. "I don't want a life without animals," she told AFP. And pets' environmental impact is not limited to their carbon footprint, as cats and dogs devastate wildlife, spread disease and pollute waterways, the Vales say. With a total 7.7 million cats in Britain, more than 188 million wild animals are hunted, killed and eaten by feline predators per year, or an average 25 birds, mammals and frogs per cat, according to figures in the New Scientist. Likewise, dogs decrease biodiversity in areas they are walked, while their faeces cause high bacterial levels in rivers and streams, making the water unsafe to drink, starving waterways of oxygen and killing aquatic life. And cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease. But despite the apocalyptic visions of domesticated animals' environmental impact, solutions exist, including reducing pets' protein-rich meat intake. "If pussy is scoffing 'Fancy Feast' -- or some other food made from choice cuts of meat -- then the relative impact is likely to be high," said Robert Vale. "If, on the other hand, the cat is fed on fish heads and other leftovers from the fishmonger, the impact will be lower." Other potential positive steps include avoiding walking your dog in wildlife-rich areas and keeping your cat indoors at night when it has a particular thirst for other, smaller animals' blood. As with buying a car, humans are also encouraged to take the environmental impact of their future possession/companion into account. But the best way of compensating for that paw or clawprint is to make sure your animal is dual purpose, the Vales urge. Get a hen, which offsets its impact by laying edible eggs, or a rabbit, prepared to make the ultimate environmental sacrifice by ending up on the dinner table. "Rabbits are good, provided you eat them," said Robert Vale.
Religion & Spirituality - 12 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
haha now the environmentalists want to take your precious pets? lol Nothing is safe from their guilt-driven tyrannical grasp!
2 :
According to the news lately, guess so.
3 :
no
4 :
ecological non-sense; politically motivated propaganda; the ocean puts off the most CO2; should we ban it as well....
5 :
Read about the future of this planet, in this verse. 2 Peter 3:10.
6 :
Catfish are genus Satans.
7 :
If we didn't eat cows, pigs, chickens etc. they would become extinct! Is that what fanatical environmentalists want, more animals becoming extinct? :P
8 :
LOLZ. And what happens after we get rid of all the pets and find ourselves in an even worse situation as they did in London with the plague. Which was caused because they got rid of all the cats and dogs that were killing all the rats. Robot Vale sounds like an animal hating moron. ;) Practicing Shaman... quantum physics rocks
9 :
Yes, I've heard this claim before. Too bad global warming is a load of crap. The Earth has been heating and cooling since it's genesis. Every generation there needs to be some crisis to "solve" to make politicians look good.
10 :
I could never cuddle up with a hen. I love my cats and doggy too much to even think of getting rid of them. There's always something out there for people to do research on. They should work on getting a cure for cancer, aids, or even the common cold. Let the animals have their homes with their loving families.
11 :
I'll tell my cat he's having fish heads for his dinner. That would certainly bring on doomsday
12 :
I'm vegan. My dogs are vegetarians. Only the cat eats meat because for him it is a biological imperative. We pick up our pet waste. Our cat litter is biodegradable. None of our pets are allowed to roam.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Poor NZ student financial aid
Poor NZ student financial aid?
I'm a pretty damn poor student in Wellington NZ but don't qualify for a student allowance due to my parents income. They're by no means rich and definitely can't afford to help me out financially. I'm just wondering what other help i can get financially without resorting to a loan? My course is too intense for part time work so that's not an option. The frustrating thing is the fact that i can name over 10 friends off the top of my head that are from extremely wealthy families but who somehow qualify for a full allowance??!?!? Government needs to sort their f**king s**t out. If i do have a computer it must be extremely small as i cant seem to find it.. im using the university ones.
Financial Aid - 2 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
you clearly have enough to own a computer
2 :
mmmm. if you take a year off, work, then you can be considered financially independant. your parents income will then not matter, so the government will care about you being poor and give you a student allowance if your grades are high enough, apply for academic scholarships at uni otherwise, get a part time job anyway, do uni part time, get a loan. if the government won't give you money, nobody else is gonna give it away for free.
I'm a pretty damn poor student in Wellington NZ but don't qualify for a student allowance due to my parents income. They're by no means rich and definitely can't afford to help me out financially. I'm just wondering what other help i can get financially without resorting to a loan? My course is too intense for part time work so that's not an option. The frustrating thing is the fact that i can name over 10 friends off the top of my head that are from extremely wealthy families but who somehow qualify for a full allowance??!?!? Government needs to sort their f**king s**t out. If i do have a computer it must be extremely small as i cant seem to find it.. im using the university ones.
Financial Aid - 2 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
you clearly have enough to own a computer
2 :
mmmm. if you take a year off, work, then you can be considered financially independant. your parents income will then not matter, so the government will care about you being poor and give you a student allowance if your grades are high enough, apply for academic scholarships at uni otherwise, get a part time job anyway, do uni part time, get a loan. if the government won't give you money, nobody else is gonna give it away for free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)