London pollution warning.

On Mar 26, 9:16*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Mar 25, 1:01 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
For several days now there have been moderate pollution warnings but
today, Friday, this has turned to 'High' and people are advised to
stay indoors. So cyclists beware and we can thank the many motorists
on our roads for contributing to that harmful pollution.

the air quality monitoring thingy shows all of London as green, so
all ok actually:http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/default.asp

Are you on a different planet to me? The zones coloured red show a
high level of pollution for the 25th.

I usehttp://www.airtext.info/which give daily text reports when
pollution rises to 'moderate' (most of the time) to 'high' yesterday.

Doug.

yes, most people are on a different planet to you !! *However, that site was
showing all green when I posted. *It shows all red today, and no index for
yesterday, perhaps it is not very good, airtext shows all green today, one
of them is very wrong.

So that is your excuse for continuing to contribute to harmful air
pollution.

Doug.

On Mar 27, 3:45*pm, Matt B wrote:
On 26/03/2011 18:09, Tony Raven wrote:

*wrote:

Drivers can be exposed to even higher levels of health-damaging pollutants
than those experienced by cyclists and pedestrians.

so cyclists do not need to whinge about it as they have less of it to
breathe than car drivers suffer.

That's a bit like saying that passive smokers have no need to complain
because they breathe less smoke than smokers.

IIRC, there was a 40-year study carried out in America that followed the
lives of 100,000, or more, couples - where one smoked and one didn't,
comparing them with couples where neither smoked, and that it showed
that the non-smokers living with smokers showed an insignificant
increased risk of developing a serious smoke-related illness over
non-smokers who lived with non-smokers for the same period.

Was this conducted by the tobacco industry? Surely though the gases
escaping from nearby fuel burning vehicles must have more passive
effect than nearby ciggies.

Doug

Peter Keller wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:48:17 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 27/03/2011 23:24, Tony Raven wrote:
Peter wrote:

I also am not in favour of restricting people's freedoms to live life
and be happy, providing those people do not interfere with other
people's similar rights.



"If I'm in a restaurant and I'm eating and somebody says, 'Hey, mind if
I smoke,' I always ask, "No, mind if I fart?" - Steve Martin


We could of course have had 'choice'. But that wasn't the point of the
legislation.

That is his choice, though by such an action he seems to show that he
does mind if that person smokes. So why not be honest and say so?
Rather than a retaliatory measure of farting ...



HINT: Steve Martin is a comedian and it was said in a comedy sketch.

--
Tony

On 28 Mar 2011 07:47:02 GMT, Tony Raven wrote:

Peter Keller wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:48:17 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 27/03/2011 23:24, Tony Raven wrote:
Peter wrote:

I also am not in favour of restricting people's freedoms to live life
and be happy, providing those people do not interfere with other
people's similar rights.



"If I'm in a restaurant and I'm eating and somebody says, 'Hey, mind if
I smoke,' I always ask, "No, mind if I fart?" - Steve Martin


We could of course have had 'choice'. But that wasn't the point of the
legislation.

That is his choice, though by such an action he seems to show that he
does mind if that person smokes. So why not be honest and say so?
Rather than a retaliatory measure of farting ...



HINT: Steve Martin is a comedian and it was said in a comedy sketch.

Relevance : nil

HINT : Tony Ravin is a ****.


--


"Then back to my club on Pall Mall "

Tony Raven - pretentious tosser

On 28/03/2011 08:39, Doug wrote:
On Mar 27, 3:45 pm, Matt wrote:
On 26/03/2011 18:09, Tony Raven wrote:

wrote:

Drivers can be exposed to even higher levels of health-damaging pollutants
than those experienced by cyclists and pedestrians.

so cyclists do not need to whinge about it as they have less of it to
breathe than car drivers suffer.

That's a bit like saying that passive smokers have no need to complain
because they breathe less smoke than smokers.

IIRC, there was a 40-year study carried out in America that followed the
lives of 100,000, or more, couples - where one smoked and one didn't,
comparing them with couples where neither smoked, and that it showed
that the non-smokers living with smokers showed an insignificant
increased risk of developing a serious smoke-related illness over
non-smokers who lived with non-smokers for the same period.

Was this conducted by the tobacco industry?

Would that matter, or make a difference?

Surely though the gases
escaping from nearby fuel burning vehicles must have more passive
effect than nearby ciggies.

And yet society has decided that, despite that consequential potential
health hazard, not only will they tolerate motor vehicle use (as some
would tobacco use), but that they will actively demand and rely upon it.
London, for instance, would quickly cease to function if the most
polluting vehicles (buses, taxis and goods vehicles) were barred from
the streets.

--
Matt B

On 28/03/2011 08:21, Peter Keller wrote:

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:48:17 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 27/03/2011 23:24, Tony Raven wrote:
Peter wrote:

I also am not in favour of restricting people's freedoms to live life
and be happy, providing those people do not interfere with other
people's similar rights.

"If I'm in a restaurant and I'm eating and somebody says, 'Hey, mind if
I smoke,' I always ask, "No, mind if I fart?" - Steve Martin

We could of course have had 'choice'. But that wasn't the point of the
legislation.

That is his choice, though by such an action he seems to show that he
does mind if that person smokes. So why not be honest and say so?
Rather than a retaliatory measure of farting ...

I think there may a bit of the old Chinese Whispers at work there, as well as
a possible urban myth.

The first time I ever heard that story it was told in the first person by
Jasper Carrott at a live gig in Warrington, c. 1978.

The way he told it (and this predates both the international fame of Steve
Martin and the advent of "Saturday Night Live") was that when asked if it was
alright to smoke, he replied: "Do you mind if I fart?", prefaced by no
explicit or implied consent to the smoke pollution.The implication was that
if the other person was offended by the return question and its directness of
language, it ws supposed to make him stop and think.

On 28/03/2011 08:39, Doug wrote:
On Mar 27, 3:45 pm, Matt wrote:
On 26/03/2011 18:09, Tony Raven wrote:

wrote:

Drivers can be exposed to even higher levels of health-damaging pollutants
than those experienced by cyclists and pedestrians.

so cyclists do not need to whinge about it as they have less of it to
breathe than car drivers suffer.

That's a bit like saying that passive smokers have no need to complain
because they breathe less smoke than smokers.

IIRC, there was a 40-year study carried out in America that followed the
lives of 100,000, or more, couples - where one smoked and one didn't,
comparing them with couples where neither smoked, and that it showed
that the non-smokers living with smokers showed an insignificant
increased risk of developing a serious smoke-related illness over
non-smokers who lived with non-smokers for the same period.

Was this conducted by the tobacco industry? Surely though the gases
escaping from nearby fuel burning vehicles must have more passive
effect than nearby ciggies.

Especially from old Landrovers with knackered engines (worn out enough that
they might as well be left to rot in the North African desert).

On Mar 28, 8:34*am, Doug wrote:
On Mar 26, 9:16*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:

Doug wrote:
On Mar 25, 1:01 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
For several days now there have been moderate pollution warnings but
today, Friday, this has turned to 'High' and people are advised to
stay indoors. So cyclists beware and we can thank the many motorists
on our roads for contributing to that harmful pollution.

the air quality monitoring thingy shows all of London as green, so
all ok actually:http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/default.asp

Are you on a different planet to me? The zones coloured red show a
high level of pollution for the 25th.

I usehttp://www.airtext.info/whichgive daily text reports when
pollution rises to 'moderate' (most of the time) to 'high' yesterday.

Doug.

yes, most people are on a different planet to you !! *However, that site was
showing all green when I posted. *It shows all red today, and no index for
yesterday, perhaps it is not very good, airtext shows all green today, one
of them is very wrong.

So that is your excuse for continuing to contribute to harmful air
pollution.

Doug.

What's your excuse for posting lies on usenet?

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:35:17 +0100, Judith wrote:

On 28 Mar 2011 07:47:02 GMT, Tony Raven wrote:

Peter Keller wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:48:17 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 27/03/2011 23:24, Tony Raven wrote:
Peter wrote:

I also am not in favour of restricting people's freedoms to live
life and be happy, providing those people do not interfere with
other people's similar rights.



"If I'm in a restaurant and I'm eating and somebody says, 'Hey, mind
if I smoke,' I always ask, "No, mind if I fart?" - Steve Martin


We could of course have had 'choice'. But that wasn't the point of
the legislation.

That is his choice, though by such an action he seems to show that he
does mind if that person smokes. So why not be honest and say so?
Rather than a retaliatory measure of farting ...



HINT: Steve Martin is a comedian and it was said in a comedy sketch.

Relevance : nil

HINT : Tony Ravin is a ****.

Oh what an honour to be ****ted by the Judith.



--

snip


--
67.4% of statistics are made up.