GOP Works to Defund Studies So They Can Deny Climate Change

On 5/19/15 3:52 PM, Paul Schlyter wrote, about Europe:

On mountains you have good connection because you're high up. But in
rural valleys it can be hard to get a connection. And in wilderness
areas you May hile for many days without getting a cell phone
connection. I have done that.

Interesting claim. Forgetting the connection issue for the moment, where
can one find a wilderness area in Europe offering a hike of "many days"
without exiting said wilderness? Place looks pretty built up to me.

On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-5, lal_truckee wrote:
On 5/19/15 3:52 PM, Paul Schlyter wrote, about Europe:

On mountains you have good connection because you're high up. But in
rural valleys it can be hard to get a connection. And in wilderness
areas you May hile for many days without getting a cell phone
connection. I have done that.

Interesting claim. Forgetting the connection issue for the moment, where
can one find a wilderness area in Europe offering a hike of "many days"
without exiting said wilderness? Place looks pretty built up to me.

Probably in Caucasus mountains or eastern Romania?

On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 7:10:18 PM UTC-4, lal_truckee wrote:
On 5/19/15 3:52 PM, Paul Schlyter wrote, about Europe:

On mountains you have good connection because you're high up. But in
rural valleys it can be hard to get a connection. And in wilderness
areas you May hile for many days without getting a cell phone
connection. I have done that.

Interesting claim. Forgetting the connection issue for the moment, where
can one find a wilderness area in Europe offering a hike of "many days"
without exiting said wilderness? Place looks pretty built up to me.

IIRC, Schlyter lives in Sweden, which has a population density approx the same as Colorado, and a higher density than Kansas.

On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 4:09:11 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/bu...cost.html?_r=0

A 2013 article?
Most British mobile phone users have a two year contract which includes a
"free phone".

That is what many US cell phone users have as well.

Only infrequent users and those who wish to hide their identity have pay as
you go.

Are either of those a problem for you?

How about lower cost? Is THAT a problem for you?

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/0...ne-plans/?_r=0

There is plenty of wifi coverage so not as much need to use 3G/4/G.
I use BT wifi and assign a small part of my wifi to other BT users. In
return I have wifi hotspots all over the country to use so I don't often
need to use my Vodafone 3G or 4G.

The UK has a pop density more than 6x that of the Lower 48 States. It should be comparatively easy to provide coverage in the UK.

The government has gone even further than standardisation and is about to
compel phone companies to share their towers in areas where coverage from
some operators is poor.

http://www.deadcellzones.com/UK.html#.VV_Lq5MZDIU

There are dead zones even in London.

On Fri, 22 May 2015 16:10:16 -0700, lal_truckee
wrote:
On 5/19/15 3:52 PM, Paul Schlyter wrote, about Europe:

On mountains you have good connection because you're high up.
But in
rural valleys it can be hard to get a connection. And in
wilderness
areas you May hile for many days without getting a cell phone
connection. I have done that.

Interesting claim. Forgetting the connection issue for the moment,
where
can one find a wilderness area in Europe offering a hike of "many
days"
without exiting said wilderness? Place looks pretty built up to me.

?n northernmost Sweden, north of Abisko, there are such areas. You
cannot go there by car since there are no roads there. That's where I
made this observation.

You also have the famous national park Sarek, which sometimes is
called "Europe's last wilderness". Sarek doesn't even have hiking
trails, so only seasoned hikers go into Sarek.

In Quadibloc
wrote:

On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 5:54:45 AM UTC-6,
wrote:
On Thursday, May 21, 2015 at 2:49:48 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson
wrote:

Democracy does not always degenerate to mob rule.

Democracy doesn't ever have to degenerate into mob rule, since it
already IS mob rule.

Perhaps you have not heard of the existence of the Supreme Court? Or
the Constitution?

Why yes, but since the US system of government is not a "democracy," so
what?

--
St. Paul, MN

On Sat, 23 May 2015 14:25:56 +0000 (UTC), Bert
wrote:

Why yes, but since the US system of government is not a "democracy," so
what?

Nonsense. This is one of the stupidest arguments pseudointellectuals
love to offer. A democracy is any system in which political choice is
largely in the hands of the electorate. That includes the U.S.

In Chris L Peterson
wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2015 14:25:56 +0000 (UTC), Bert
wrote:

Why yes, but since the US system of government is not a "democracy,"
so what?

Nonsense. This is one of the stupidest arguments pseudointellectuals
love to offer. A democracy is any system in which political choice is
largely in the hands of the electorate.

You are not Humpty Dumpty. You do not get to change the meaning of words
to suit your mood.

That includes the U.S.

The US is a representative republic.

--
St. Paul, MN

On Sat, 23 May 2015 14:48:00 +0000 (UTC), Bert
wrote:

The US is a representative republic.

A form of democracy. But if you want to make yourself look stupid, I
can't stop you.

In Chris L Peterson
wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2015 14:48:00 +0000 (UTC), Bert
wrote:

The US is a representative republic.

A form of democracy.

Fascinating.

But if you want to make yourself look stupid, I can't stop you.

Funny.

--
St. Paul, MN