BS: Global warming, yes/no?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mooman
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 10:15 AM

Clickit here for a continuation of this thread.

mooman

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mooman
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 04:36 AM

Good post CarolC! I attended a seminar of the "European-Japanese Experts Group" (a sort of "think tank") a few years ago and heard a very good presentation by the Japanese Environmental Director (or something similar) of one of the big Japanese electronics companies who had totally implemented the international environmental management standard, ISO 14001, at ALL of their numerous manufacturing sites.

He quoted that in Europe legislators often talk of "PPP" (usually an acronym for "public-private partnerships"). In his company they used the same acronym but, this time, standing for "(environmental) "protection provides profits". This struck me as very interesting.

The company had completely rationalised its materials procurement and use policy, its energy use, its discharges to water and air (which is basically throwing money down the drain or up the flue), and redesign of the energy usage and radiation emission of its projects (which enabled it to label many of its products "green" which immediately interested a large group of consumers). The implementation of the environmental management process certainly cost them a lot of money but, in the longer term, enabled them to make greater profits due to energy and material savings, less money spent on "clean up" and greater sales.

Perhaps this is an example of the type of innovative thinking you were referring to Carol?

JonW (25 June, 7:36 post). Most probably its the divine inspiration I'm lacking at the moment!

Good idea Carol, let's take this to a (part 2) if people are interested in continuing the discussion!

mooman

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 01:05 AM

They're in the process of making the necessary arrangements, DougR.

What do you think, maybe time for round two of this thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: DougR
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 12:44 AM

I hadn't heard that many foreign countries were on the verge of signing the treaty. Mostly I've heard criticism of Bush because he thinks the accord is flawed. I suppose a fair person might agree that the President of the United States has a right to his opinion too. Bush has said that he would support an accord that he does not considered to be flawed.

The foreign countries that are being so critical of Bush would strengthen their argument if they would go on and sign it themselves, IMO.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:49 PM

Ok. I'm re-posting the rest of it because I can see that the whole thing is playing peekaboo...

Here's my prediction. We have two choices. We can be the leaders of the innovations that are not only possible, they are inevitable, or we can be lazy thinkers and some other country will do it. And they will have the competitive advantage when they do.

This is what happened to the automotive industry back in the 1970s. The U.S. automobile industry became over confident and complacent. The foreign car industry (principally Japanese) used innovation to capture and dominate the market.

As we speak, some European countries are doing exactly what many Americans are saying is impractical. They will own the market and we will be shaking our heads wondering how they did that. And feeling kind of stupid and looking for someone to blame. We will have no one to blame but ourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:43 PM

I'm re-posting the last part of my last post because it's doing the 'amazing disappearing post trick'.

"As an American, I'd like to remind all the EU members out their that none of their governments have signed the Kyoto protocol either."

They have agreed to it, and they are in the process of preparing to sign it. That's way more than what we have done.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: thosp
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:33 PM

sounds like the nail on the head CarolC

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:28 PM

Here's my prediction. We have two choices. We can be the leaders of the innovations that are not only possible, they are inevitable, or we can be lazy thinkers and some other country will do it. And they will have the competitive advantage when they do.

This is what happened to the automotive industry back in the 1970s. The U.S. automobile industry became over confident and complacent. The foreign car industry (principally Japanese) used innovation to capture and dominate the market.

As we speak, some European countries are doing exactly what many Americans are saying is impractical. They will own the market and we will be shaking our heads wondering how they did that. And feeling kind of stupid and looking for someone to blame. We will have no one to blame but ourselves.

"As an American, I'd like to remind all the EU members out their that none of their governments have signed the Kyoto protocol either."

They have agreed to it, and they are in the process of preparing to sign it. That's way more than what we have done.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: DougR
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 08:52 PM

For those of you who are still interested in listening to a discussion on the subject, and can get Fox News Network, Hannity & Colmes is scheduling one tonight on their show (at least that's what the promotions for the show indicate). The show is aired twice nightly. Hannity is a conservative, and Colmes is a liberal. They have spirited debates on a variety of subjects and usually have recognized experts in the subject being discussed as guests. Time zones vary, of course, so both shows may already have been aired in your area.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Jon W.
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 07:36 PM

Here's more:

Yes, let's conserve energy and resources. Yes, let's do what we can to eliminate pollution. Yes, let's recycle where and what we can. Yes, let's find alternate energy sources. Solar makes a lot of sense for some things. Wind makes sense for a few things. Nuclear power makes the most sense for most things but people have a lot of irrational fears about it. And we have to do all this without depriving people of living wages and freedom, and with only moderate changes in lifestyle. Otherwise, folks, it's not going to work. There is simply too much inertia. And a bunch of bureaucrats, diplomats, and scare-mongerers isn't going to do it. It's going to take some dedicated scientists, competent engineers, and a good measure of divine inspiration to solve these problems. Now I think I've said enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: DougR
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 07:02 PM

Jon W.: Duck! Good luck! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Jon W.
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 04:17 PM

As an American, I'd like to remind all the EU members out their that none of their governments have signed the Kyoto protocol either.

Frankly I don't believe that it serves anyone's interest but politicians to mandate a standard before the technical solution is feasible. Mandating seat belts and air bags in cars worked because those advances were technically feasible (air bags needed some improvement, so I've heard). Mandating emission-free cars didn't work because they are not technically feasible. I wish they were and I believe they may become so in the not-so-distant future. I'd love to see a solar powered AC. I'd love to drive a zero-emission car. I have recently begun working at home, and it's great. I'd love to see the rain forests left intact, but also see the people who live in and near them be able to afford to live without burning down the trees. Gotta go, more later...

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: pavane
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 04:36 AM

Uncreep the thread! It has been claimed that the single action which would have most impact on reducing emissions and consumption of fossil fules, at least here in the UK, would be for more people to work at home.
This could reduce road use by up to 25%
Government incentives may be needed in order to convince businesses that it works!
I would welcome this, because I drive a lot of miles (currently 80 per day, and often more) just to arrive at a desk to use a PC for work that I could do quite well on my own at home. And as a freelance, I sometimes have to work several hundred miles from home.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 02:52 PM

Reading over some of the earlier posts, Mooman speaks of the ostrich mentality. It is probably the most important point raised here. In an English newspaper I saw many years ago, it was called the "I'm all right, Jack, t'Hell with the rest" attitude. The great majority of the people, in any place, have this attitude. You may get tired of fighting it, but what else, with conscience, can you do? Everybody "muddles through" until a crisis demands action. Emergency actions are expensive, whereas making logical corrections as careful study requires is cheaper.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 07:41 AM

Thanks mooman. Slainte Mhath.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mooman
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:51 PM

P.S. Gnu, I'm Irish as well as if you hadn't probably guessed already!

Cheers

mooman

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mooman
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:45 PM

Dear all,

Pleased to announce to all that Gnu and I have sorted out our "differences". In fact it all was a misunderstanding and we were on the same side all along!

Next time I'm in Canada I sincerely hope we will be able buy each other a pint or two of the local best, play some good music together and laugh about the follies of internet communication.

My best regards to you Gnu and, as always, to all my other friends reading this thread and on the Mudcat in general.

Pax,

mooman

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:42 PM

No offence taken, the first great Geordi sweat is to be organised. Shields old man, read, if you will, the letter from the Burmingham Jail, by Dr. M.L. King, Jr. . In making change we need to get well organized with each other and within our selves. Noting the problem is only part of the solution, and though much better than the denial of a problem, we have to build a mighty community of change to bring about a solution, so here's my hand old chum, now lets get to work, to find common ground and work for change.
Proposal # 1... To those who oppose the notion that global warming is a reality, you must agree that it is a really bad idea to cut down rain forrest to raise beef sold at McD's in the US, not only for the damage to the environment, but for the ecconomic damage to the US cattle industry... If you all conceed that, then step 2, lets talk about car exhast emmissions, find common ground, and stop spending so much effort butting heads or kicking butts. There is not enough time for that.
Cheers, all.
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 03:16 PM

moo... boo !?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 03:11 PM

YORKSHIRE!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 03:08 PM

Looks to me like he's a man from England (Yorkshire?) who is not happy with what's happening to the environment. It looks like he feels (with some justification, in my opinion) that American consumerism is at least part of the problem. And it's pretty clear that he has no love for GW Bush. He also enjoys a pint or two of an evening, and taking the piss out of the rest of us.

Am I close, SF?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 02:39 PM

Has anybody figured you out, SF? And... DO YOU REALLY WANT THEM TO?

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 02:02 PM

sorry about the T word InOBU. I thought you were questioning my manhood (or my opinion) with the girly reference. It didn't occur to me that you hadn't figured me out.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:51 PM

Ah well, pints no, insults no, accordians GOD no, in fact one has to remove all rings and foriegn bodies, as it get so hot that one can be burned serriously if one has mettle on, as to spelling, don't fault anyone on spelling, I graduated the 3rd best law school in the states, and as you see, I can't spell, and as far as being called a twat, (which I supose was the intent of the post) I was told by justice Mary Winn, a jurist I have great respect for, from Colville Indian Nation, that a Native judge has to have 7 thickness' of shin, I not only have that, but a rather thick head as well!
Now Shields ol' being, I generally agree with you on your politics, though I do think your presentation can use a bit of a tune up! I really think a sweat lodge would do all a world of good. I never had a sweat on your side of the ocean, maybe we can arrainge one! I am a great believer in individual rather than global warming...
I do play the tune, An phis Fluich, but though I have heard you are what you eat (I better not go there!) I have not been told we are what we play!!!
Best wishes
Larry (InOBU - Lorcan Ri - Judge White Bread - or as my father used to call me, "shut up will ye fer God's sake!!!..." or Mr T as Sheilds refers to me, all the same to me!)

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:28 PM

She might, but she charges money for it. So it appears that the burning question right now is whether or not you are male or female. I think you're male. InOBU is waiting to be enlighetned on the matter. He needs to know in order to determine what lodge to put you in.

We haven't asked him if we can have our pints and half pints in the lodges. If you are male, it looks like I may have to be in a sweat lodge all by myself. That doesn't sound like fun.

Larry, I want to be in the sweat lodge with the guys. Maybe you can set up a partition so they can't get too close to me. I'll wear more than just my accordion, I promise.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:16 PM

Perhaps you could get your sister to proof read my posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:11 PM

My sister used to be a technical editor for bunch of scientists. She said they (as a group) had the worst grammar and spelling she had ever seen. She didn't mind, though. It was her job security.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:03 PM

arse instead of arsehole

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: pavane
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:53 PM

I can't take seriously the scientific credentials of those who don't even know basic spelling and grammar. Who's instead of whose, your instead of you're and so on.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:39 PM

InObu and your a twat!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:24 PM

After PM'ing mooman, I think mooman and I understand where I went wrong. After that, I could only see my Irish temper and was reading things into his posts that he had not intended. I believe we can now have pints without bloodshed and I might even be able to march along with him in protest of Global Warming.

Still can't see the solar powered AC's taking off, though. Did I miss the specs ?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:18 PM

Ok, let me get this straight, Gnu is a fellow, (settle this like Gentlemen...) and Shields Folk is a wee girleen... ? Just figureing all this out for the impending sweat.... - Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:32 AM

There has GOT to be some kind of miscommunication going on here, mooman. I will PM you and straighten this out like the gentleman I, and you, am/are. BTW, I still am on your side of the GW issue, like I posted above.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mooman
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:14 AM

Dear Gnu,

Again read my posts CAREFULLY. You will see I have insulted nobody here, neither have I been unpleasant to you although you find it necessary to use the f*** word at me without knowing THE SLIGHTEST THING ABOUT ME.

I have ALL the arguments I need to back up my case. I have been an environmental scientist for the past 30 years and I do believe I know what I am talking about. I believe you are the only person on this forum that has described any of my posts as pathetic over the past two years I have been here.

Next time I am anywhere near you when I next visit Canada I am more than willing to visit you, show you the type of person I am and argue my points and arguments IN PERSON with you. Perhaps we could play some music afterwards.

Your offer to buy the pints is much appreciated and the second round will be on me.

Respectfully,

mooman

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 10:58 AM

mooman... your last post is, at best, pathetic. Again, you offer conclusions without support. You started it; I finished it. Unpleasant ? Only in return. Diplomacy ? I don't bend over for anyone. Arguement ? You have none.

You said, "You are proving what you are. My posts demonstrate what I am." My point exactly ! Thanks for your concurrence.

See you at the lodge. Pints are on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 09:02 AM

Hi Gnu:
You ask are the sweats co-ed? NO!!! NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! Sorry, missed that part of the argument! You will have to sweat with folks with your own plumbing! One of the worst events I ever had to witness in another tribe had to do with a male/female sweat - the aftermath not the actual sweat! We'll get two lodges going, and when you are both all exhasted and feeling wonderful, stick you both next to a big roaring fire, with lots of friends about and figure all this out!
A brief not on "Your Honnor..." When meeting with non-native government or scholastic folks, I allow use of "Your Honnor", in order to show respect to the Paugeesukq Nation, rather than to me, but, as we are a peace maker court, well, here is a wee story.
I had suggested that I not be appointed by the council, as I am not native, to which the council chief replied, with a laugh, that I was assimilated, usualy an insult used against natives. So, the after taking the honnor, the first day my cleark called and said, "Congradulations, your Honnor..." "Och, no, Sparrow...," "says I "In a peacemaker court, when I am on the bench, Judge will do, but keep calling me Larry." The next day the phone rings and Sparrow says "HEEYYY!!! Good morning Judge WHITE BREAD!" "I think we can go back to Your Honnor," I say.
Play nice and keep talking,
All the best
Judge White Bread. (Larry)

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: MAV
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 08:48 AM

Good Grief!

All this bitching and hugging, and I haven't even been here.

Solar AC sounds real likely to be a solution (of course it probably wouldn't work at night).

It is hottest when the sun shines hardest (duh) so you cover your roof with photovoltaic cells (copper or silicon) who's price will continue to go down as production increases.

Your voltage can go to a marine deep discharge battery bank which then drives a 12 or 24 volt conventional refrigerant closed loop evaporative system.

A well insulated house would be ultimately important.

This would be considered a "solution" largely if most people in places like CA were to install it. Think of the job creation.

There are other likely methods of course

Myself....I don't believe in either Air conditioning or CFCs adverse effect on the ozone layer.

The US may create 25% of the 5% of the CO2 NOT caused by nature.

Theat means they DON'T CREATE THE OTHER 75%!

You can draw your own conclusions, as this site illustrates Carbon Monoxide (CO) pollution which is poisonous to air breathers (as opposed to CO2 which we exhale).

CO is a product of incomplete combustion and because it chemically wants to become a stable coumpound it can result in acid rain and the formation of other atmospheric chemicals including CO2.

Cool NASA Visable Earth CO photos

Since it follows that the concentration would be strongest near the source (deep red color) and considering atmospheric drift. It looks like Africa and China are the largest sources of serious CO production nevermind CO2.

It also looks like the US is not.

Here I go

mav out

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: mooman
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:26 AM

Gnu,

You are proving what you are. My posts demonstrate what I am. I do not twist words. You clearly do.

I am not prepared to discuss the matter any more with you. I have visited Canada many times and you are the only unpleasant Canadian I have ever met.

Others in this thread clearly have a greater grasp of diplomacy and argument than you do.

mooman

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Naemanson
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:25 AM

I'm sorry to have to use those words, Doug, but I do not have the direct quotes close to hand. However, in an interview with a few climate scientists I heard them agreeing that the majority of climatologists agree that the globe is warming up. They just disagree about the causes.

Consider this. Back in the 70's there was a shift in the ocean currents along Popham Beach here in Maine and suddenly there was tremendous beach erosion. Everyone was up in arms. Beach cottages were threatened, a popular recreational area was being lost. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent trying to maintain the beach and save the cottages. All to no avail.

Finally the state decided to let nature take its course and let the cottages go. Trying to save the area was too expensive. The landowners were incensed and the lawsuits started immediately. This too was a very expensive process.

My point is that when the ocean levels start to rise we will be facing calls to save the expensive ocean front properties. And we will be facing very expensive lawsuits when we fail to act. Money will be spent no matter which way we turn. Property losses will be staggering. The pittance we spend now may not do anything but, like in the Y2K problem, isn't it better to try?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:45 AM

Like I said in my second post, I AM CANADIAN, but not like the 'nucks ('nyucks ?) in those insipid beer commercials.

Well, lots of good stuff here. Seems that we have only one logical approach and that is to combat GW. So, I'm on board. BUT, I need my truck for my business and I can't afford two vehicles, so I will still use it for short trips around town... just the way it is.

Bert... my leg's gettin awful long waiting for those AC specs... nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: DougR
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:54 AM

Naemanson: The telling words in your message, as far as I'm concerned are, "as far as I know."

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:53 AM

I (another Canuck albeit transplanted) cannot agree with Gnu (we will keep to opposite sides of the sweatlodge and we obviously need more than the smell of burning sweetgrass to reach agreement, but like him, I agree that there is much misinformation and half-baked thought out there- and here as well). Looking at pollution alone and ignoring climatic shifts the following thoughts come to mind. The oil companies are stockholder-driven- it is you and me with our investments that determine long range policy (majors of course; small speculative companies have mostly short range strategy). If alternate sources of energy are feasable to the extent that the major world economies need them, the energy companies will find a way to make a profit from them. At present, some sort of nuclear-electrical seems the way of the future (current problem is storage or disposal of waste radioactive material). Wind will work in some areas, but it is hell on bird life and must cover very large areas. Straight solar is seasonal in many areas. Water power for electrical is reaching its limit. Hydrogen has a bright future for automotive transport and the first vehicles will be on sale within five years. Governments have a hard time convincing people to use public transit or to build enough to make it people-friendly (the US and Canada have problems with large distances- I can only envy Europeans with their short distances, centralized population and hence good public transportation. How do we convince people over here to live in high rises, condos, row houses, etc, when everyone thinks they must have their own lawn to mow and space for their horse? Climatic shifts not due to Man are (I think) slow enough that there is time to adjust (I mentioned moving New Orleans upriver as sealevel rises but shifts of this kind can be planned for). All of this boils down to the need for rational thought and long range planning for the future.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:17 AM

You need to reset your cookie, Dicho. Click on 'membership' in the banner at the top of the page, and click on 'reset cookie' and follow the directions. Don't worry about it. I happens to the best of us from time to time.

You'll probably want to have a look through the 'Mudcat Faq' permathread at the top of the list of threads on the home page.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: GUEST,Dicho
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:10 AM

Just curious. How come I became a guest after a spell as a member??

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Naemanson
Date: 22 Jun 01 - 11:10 PM

You know, a lot of people talk about whether or not global warming is a fact. As far as I know the mjority of scientists have decided that global warming is indeed happening all around us. The real question is whether or not our species is wholly or in part responsible for it. The science isn't in on that part of the question.

But consider this...

If we are part or all of the problem and we do nothing we are condemning our grandchildren to a much more difficult life than we have ever seen. If we are not the problem and we do something we will have made our lives better for the improvement in the efficiency and cleanliness of our toys.

The answer is obvious.

Also, please note that I agree that many times in the past has our planet's climate changed. Each time has resulted in massive extinctions. The human race may indeed survive but we have so damaged the ecosystem that a higher percentage of the living species around us may not make it. That is, a higher percentage than have ever been lost before. At what point does biodiversity go out the window?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jun 01 - 07:42 PM

(Oops. Don't mind me, folks. I'm from the Department of Redundancy and Repetition Department.)

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jun 01 - 07:38 PM

gnu didn't say he was from New Brunswick on this thread, DougR. I did say in a post to this thread that he is Canadian. That was what you missed. I know he's Canadian I know because he told me on another thread a while back.

Shields Folk, I'll take that half pint if it's as good as the beer I had when I was visiting Canada last winter.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: GUEST,Sylvester Stallone
Date: 22 Jun 01 - 07:24 PM

Global warming? YO!!!

Stallone

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: DougR
Date: 22 Jun 01 - 07:16 PM

Well, SF if Gnu said he was from New Brunswick, you're right. I didn't keep up.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming, yes/no?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 22 Jun 01 - 07:02 PM

DougR your not keeping up are you?