PDA

View Full Version : What the German plane makers did after WW2



djetz
04-10-2006, 08:52 AM
THIS (http://www.fortunecity.de/arbeit/industrie/229/FILM/KLEINWAGEN/paar.htm)

And I would like to state for the record that I think they're great.

djetz
04-10-2006, 08:52 AM
THIS (http://www.fortunecity.de/arbeit/industrie/229/FILM/KLEINWAGEN/paar.htm)

And I would like to state for the record that I think they're great.

BigganD
04-10-2006, 08:57 AM
haha, damn ugly cars.

BigganD
04-10-2006, 09:00 AM
and they open like 109 cockpits.. ^^

djetz
04-10-2006, 09:23 AM
"Ugly cars"???

I find them a hell of a lot more attractive than, say, SUVs.

I hope that this idea is revived: city dwellers don't need huge 4-seater petrol-guzzling monsters.

Former Axis countries were banned from making anything warlike for a decade or so after WW2, so they turned their talents to automobiles. German, Italian, and Japanese airoplane designers were in great demand.

As stated, I think these cars are great, far more attractive than modern cars, and far more practical in terms of road safety, the environment, and just basically not using up valuable resources. Easy to park, too!

I found a really interesting site that has a lot of information (and hundreds of photos) about these cars, and is in English, too.
microcarmuseum (http://www.microcarmuseum.com/info.html)

Feathered_IV
04-10-2006, 09:35 AM
I wish I could find a pic of the Messerschmitt sewing machine. Looks like a DB though.

StG2_Schlachter
04-10-2006, 09:45 AM
Junkers constructs heatings and sanitarian stuff now

www.junkers.com (http://www.junkers.com) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Vacillator
04-10-2006, 09:51 AM
If we're talking small cars, then of course there's always the Smart car with 700cc turbo Mercedes engine, not sure how these would go down in the US?

http://www.mavromatic.com/images/zap.jpg

x6BL_Brando
04-10-2006, 12:15 PM
Our head boy - the 'school captain' - at the London grammar school I was imprisoned at - drove a BMW Isetta. He also held a mandate from the headmaster to cane the unruly - he wasn't the most popular pupil........ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

At the end of one term a group of us picked up the bubble-car and parked it in a stairs only pedestrian underpass http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Later on we realised it was only necessary to lift it and turn it to face one of the high flood-kerbs in the Hammersmith streets. With the handbrake on. Even if he could get in, no reverse gear and a steep camber meant he was still stuffed.

We promised to do it for every time he beat someone - and beatings duly lessened. By the time he left & came back complete with a Rover, as a master, the laws banning corporal punishment had been passed.

A---hole 0, Lower VC 10 and the cup! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

All thanks to a poxy two-stroke cockpit without wings - LOL

x6BL_Brando
04-10-2006, 12:21 PM
Luckily they had this to fall back on - a truly social vehicle http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/Beast-of-Dartington_red.jpg

stathem
04-10-2006, 12:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
"Ugly cars"???

I find them a hell of a lot more attractive than, say, SUVs.

I hope that this idea is revived: city dwellers don't need huge 4-seater petrol-guzzling monsters.

Former Axis countries were banned from making anything warlike for a decade or so after WW2, so they turned their talents to automobiles. German, Italian, and Japanese airoplane designers were in great demand.

As stated, I think these cars are great, far more attractive than modern cars, and far more practical in terms of road safety, the environment, and just basically not using up valuable resources. Easy to park, too!

I found a really interesting site that has a lot of information (and hundreds of photos) about these cars, and is in English, too.
microcarmuseum (http://www.microcarmuseum.com/info.html) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, some of us are trying. Public reaction and political willpower are all that are needed

http://www.goingreen.co.uk/?PageID=AboutGWiz

We have an original Indian one of these at work (we make the batteries) It's OK, but, you wouldn't want to crash one.

Grendel-B
04-10-2006, 03:39 PM
Well, one needs to look at the situation in Germany back then. People did what they could, and built what could be sold.

Eventually, Willy Messerschmitt kept working on new plane designs until 1970s, IIRC. His legacy is still out there - the ex Messerschmitt factories have built F-104 Starfighters, Tornados and now Eurofighters. Messerschmitt's post war aircraft designs number in several dozens.

Kurt Tank went on to design both successful and less successful planes in SOuth America, Spain, Egypt and India. IIRC Tank's jets flew until the 1980s in India. Biggest problems with Tank's post war planes were the small budgets and lack of cooperation from US/British manufacturers - he couldn't for example get a decent radar for his Indian supersonic jet fighter. Also engines were problematic.

Don't remember what Heinkel or Dornier did post war...

VW-IceFire
04-10-2006, 03:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vacillator:
If we're talking small cars, then of course there's always the Smart car with 700cc turbo Mercedes engine, not sure how these would go down in the US?

http://www.mavromatic.com/images/zap.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
They are already here in Canada. Not sure about down south. Funny looking things...a bit too small to be on some of our highways I think...not robust enough for winter driving either. Not in my opinion. Not bad for innercity driving mind you!

BoCfuss
04-10-2006, 04:10 PM
Horrible, except the motorcycle. Why not just drive motorcycles? How about this, hey kids get in the, well, you'll have to walk.

Texan...
04-10-2006, 04:29 PM
Nice rearend.

http://www.fortunecity.de/arbeit/industrie/229/FILM/KLEINWAGEN/mat03.jpg

x6BL_Brando
04-10-2006, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">How about this, hey kids get in the, well, you'll have to walk. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nah, just buy two http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif They'll love you for it.....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/On_the_Moor_PB.jpg

Texan...
04-10-2006, 04:41 PM
One of the only postwar "axis cars" I find to be purty.


http://www.auto-adrenalina.com/AA_Car_Wallpapers/WP24%20-%20Datsun%20240Z%20-%2020.01.2006..jpg

polak5
04-10-2006, 05:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
"Ugly cars"???

I find them a hell of a lot more attractive than, say, SUVs.

I hope that this idea is revived: city dwellers don't need huge 4-seater petrol-guzzling monsters.

Former Axis countries were banned from making anything warlike for a decade or so after WW2, so they turned their talents to automobiles. German, Italian, and Japanese airoplane designers were in great demand.

As stated, I think these cars are great, far more attractive than modern cars, and far more practical in terms of road safety, the environment, and just basically not using up valuable resources. Easy to park, too!

I found a really interesting site that has a lot of information (and hundreds of photos) about these cars, and is in English, too.
microcarmuseum (http://www.microcarmuseum.com/info.html) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, some of us are trying. Public reaction and political willpower are all that are needed

http://www.goingreen.co.uk/?PageID=AboutGWiz

We have an original Indian one of these at work (we make the batteries) It's OK, but, you wouldn't want to crash one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just dont know how many chicks i can pick up in a G-whiz http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

polak5
04-10-2006, 05:05 PM
Im not sure i would want to take this in on the autobahn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/7389/messert8lc.jpg

WWMaxGunz
04-10-2006, 05:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vacillator:
If we're talking small cars, then of course there's always the Smart car with 700cc turbo Mercedes engine, not sure how these would go down in the US?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just great until some minor ego in an SUV talking on the phone and eyes for bigger things
than the SUV only does something stupid into it. With luck the driver will be able to see
it coming and avoid which is what any MC rider has to do with even more paranoia. I've been
in a 60's mini with 1400-some cc engine as a passenger and the thing had speed and directional
control... tight turns at 75mph normal car 35mph at best, Mercedes 4-door 45mph standard hey
closer to bike agility than car. I can see some of those micro-boxes have equal capabilities.

Have you seen the BMW 2-wheelers with enclosed cockpit and the drop down training wheels for
stop or too low turns? I saw one prototype, it had floor pedals like a car, front and rear
seats and doors.

The market will not be big here for a long time. Big powerful cars are the standard ego
supplement for the average guy here. You might as well say, we want to make your weiner
small as to try and convince enough people to drive those things to make traffic any kind
of safe. Not here as long as at least some people have the money and set the status. The
rest will have kissups and the crisis of demand for fuel will continue... it's the quickest
way to screw every dollar out of the consumers you can get.

Divine-Wind
04-10-2006, 05:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Originally posted by Microcarmuseum:
http://www.microcarmuseum.com/tour/images/eshelman-red00.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Now THAT would be an AWESOME car to have as a kid.

Imagine puttering around the neighborhood while everyone stares in envy from their super-deluxe kiddie Hummers and Jeeps. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

MLudner
04-10-2006, 05:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
"Ugly cars"???

I find them a hell of a lot more attractive than, say, SUVs.

I hope that this idea is revived: city dwellers don't need huge 4-seater petrol-guzzling monsters.

Former Axis countries were banned from making anything warlike for a decade or so after WW2, so they turned their talents to automobiles. German, Italian, and Japanese airoplane designers were in great demand.

As stated, I think these cars are great, far more attractive than modern cars, and far more practical in terms of road safety, the environment, and just basically not using up valuable resources. Easy to park, too!

I found a really interesting site that has a lot of information (and hundreds of photos) about these cars, and is in English, too.
microcarmuseum (http://www.microcarmuseum.com/info.html) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif
Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude.

Interminate
04-10-2006, 07:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote:
Originally posted by djetz:
"Ugly cars"???

I find them a hell of a lot more attractive than, say, SUVs.

I hope that this idea is revived: city dwellers don't need huge 4-seater petrol-guzzling monsters.

Former Axis countries were banned from making anything warlike for a decade or so after WW2, so they turned their talents to automobiles. German, Italian, and Japanese airoplane designers were in great demand.

As stated, I think these cars are great, far more attractive than modern cars, and far more practical in terms of road safety, the environment, and just basically not using up valuable resources. Easy to park, too!

I found a really interesting site that has a lot of information (and hundreds of photos) about these cars, and is in English, too.
microcarmuseum



Nuh uh
Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude.


She Was Like A Bearded Rainbow, As You Said, drinking a Spoonful of a Strange Brew as she screamed "I Feel Free" while she basked in the Sunshine Of Your Love in her White Room at the Crossroads dreaming Tales Of Brave Ulysses during a Blue Condition with her Toad thinking she should Take It Back.

On Hyperlobby: 334th_PROXIMVS </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ludner WTFlieger are you talking about? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

WTE_Galway
04-10-2006, 10:34 PM
interesting

so apparently everything made post war by Porsche, BMW, Ducati, Ferrari, De Tomaso, Alfa Romeo, Lamborgini, Moto Guzzi and a few dozen other manufacturers are ugly ?

you guys have a funny definition of ugly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

UberPickle
04-11-2006, 02:30 AM
So I guess going from designing flamespewing warbirds of eternal torment and malice to designing small cars would be punishment enough for any engineer.

But hey, at least the cars are small. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

whiteladder
04-11-2006, 03:10 AM
Those Smart cars are pretty tough little things. A couple of the guys I work with at Cranfield University help a TV show on channel five do some tests on different cars. They made the remote control rigs for the tests in the following video

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/60538/smart_car_crash/

I not saying I would like to be in it, but there are definately worse cars to be in(I know!!)

gorillasika
04-11-2006, 03:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by whiteladder:
Those Smart cars are pretty tough little things. A couple of the guys I work with at Cranfield University help a TV show on channel five do some tests on different cars. They made the remote control rigs for the tests in the following video

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/60538/smart_car_crash/

I not saying I would like to be in it, but there are definately worse cars to be in(I know!!) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where did the engine go in that video? Smashing the legs and torso of the possible driver or what?

whiteladder
04-11-2006, 04:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Where did the engine go in that video? Smashing the legs and torso of the possible driver or what? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Its in the back in a smart car, I just spoke to one of the guys that did the test and he said that there was very little intrusion into the passenger area.

x6BL_Brando
04-11-2006, 04:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As stated, I think these cars are great, far more attractive than modern cars, and far more practical in terms of road safety, the environment, and just basically not using up valuable resources. Easy to park, too! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They have a certain kitsch but these are mostly manufacturers' advertising photos and don't tell the full tale of ownership.

For starters, they mostly ran on two-stroke fuel . The brown stains around the petrol filler are missing from the pictures...as is the cloud of blue smoke that followed them around. A total-loss lubrication system is not eco-friendly.

The smaller machines were generally unreliable too - engines & linkages gave a lot of trouble as well as door seals - and they were often a total nightmare to drive. You cannot afford to screw up in an Isetta or a Kabinenroller, not when the truck behind could just flatten you like a dozen of eggs. I actually travelled in a Messerscmitt once, as a passenger (co-pilot? Tail-gunner?) on a busy highway - it was a terrifying experience.
Road safety was distinctly lacking as we hurtled along in our smokescreen with our arses scraping along the deck. Visibility, manouevrability, acceleration and good braking - the fundamentals of safe driving - were all moderately poor. And real cars don't leak in the rain.

Basically a car's not much use either if you can't make love in it. Despite the optimistically romantic picture of the Kabinenroller publicity pic, the passenger's reality was a ride marginally better than that of the belly-gunner in a Fortress and tinged with the odours of burnt and unburnt fuel - every young woman's favourite perfume. The passenger's view was the back of the pilot's head. The lightly-padded tubular-steel seatback was about 30cm's from the noisy engine, separated by a flimsy bulkhead. Sounds familiar? It only needed an RDF set, an intercom and big, nose-mounted cannon......

The un-tinted reality was nothing like the designers' optimistic sales talk. Enclosed motor-cycle engines have always been a mechanic's nightmare, no matter where they were built. Maintenance was tricky ... and removing hot shrouding to come at the self-dismantling carburettor, on a verge in a rainstorm was no fun.
Tricycle wheel arrangements are less stable - hence the need for a lowered CoG (and CoEE = Centre of Everything Else) The outlook was appalling. Having a good view of the underneath of a ten-wheel lorry at traffic lights has limited charm after a while - especially as the wagon's exhaust pipe is level with the driver's head, and the cockpit was inevitably leaky.

And... uh oh! I think the driver of the bus behind can't see me over his bonnet! He's closing the gap! Phartbox-1 to ground control! I am bailing out! Position - King's Road, Chelsea heading for Sloane Square. Oh no! My umbrella is jammed in the pedals.....

I'm really in favour of economical, eco-friendly vehicles - that's why I ride the sidecar outfit. But I can see everything around me, and outpace the average lawnmower while using a lot less fuel and emitting far fewer hydrocarbons. I'm vulnerable to collisions of course - but I have a hugely better chance of anticipating danger and avoiding it than the guy in the Kabinet-Couchtisch

I just think it's a mistake to confuse a good concept for good, practical design. Unless everyone drives one... and freight is placed on entirely separate roads....and padded ejector-seats and oxygen masks fitted as standard....

These vehicles are just relics of post-war innovation and the need to revive a shattered industrial base with limited resources. Not to be confused with safe & economical transport http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

B.

Z4K
04-11-2006, 05:11 AM
Here's my microcar:

http://www.feltracing.com/06/04/2004_bikes/images/sr91_02.jpg

Sydney traffic and I get on just fine. Also, I can't tell if my heart rate is so high because of the exercise, or the light truck driver trying his best to kill me (heavy truck drivers of Sydney - I love you for acknowledging my presence and not killing me. Light truck drivers: I hope you die a thousand deaths of knives and scorpions).

RCAF_Irish_403
04-11-2006, 06:52 AM
I'm pretty sure some of them went to prison b/c of the whole slave labor thing

Friendly_flyer
04-11-2006, 07:01 AM
This 3-wheel Isetta is possibly one of the worst cars to take into the trafic, but I can't help wanting one!

djetz
04-11-2006, 09:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:

Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you think I'm a Nazi based on my opinion that big cars are an environmental disaster, you plainly have no idea what a Nazi is.

If you think I'm a Nazi based on my aesthetic appreciation of post war industrial design vs modern industrial design, then not only do you have no idea what a Nazi is, you are one.

Foo.bar
04-11-2006, 10:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif oh man...

the day will come when even the US build resource saving cars.

Kocur_
04-11-2006, 12:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Junkers constructs heatings and sanitarian stuff now

www.junkers.com (http://www.junkers.com) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hugo Junkers started with that back in like 1880s, in fact he invented water flow gas heater!

He got interested in aviation before WW1 with his idee fix, i.e. all metal planes. Well he knew a lot about sheet metal from his previous business http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

StG2_Schlachter
04-11-2006, 01:26 PM
Quite interesting is the fact that none of the combat aircaft used by the German Air Force during WW2 is mentioned on the Junkers Homepage.

Kocur_
04-11-2006, 01:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Quite interesting is the fact that none of the combat aircaft used by the German Air Force during WW2 is mentioned on the Junkers Homepage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well if isnt PC, its just because of different business and different company, because Junkers started a new firm to produce airplanes, while the original was still in its heaters, plumbing etc business.

StG2_Schlachter
04-11-2006, 02:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Quite interesting is the fact that none of the combat aircaft used by the German Air Force during WW2 is mentioned on the Junkers Homepage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well if isnt PC, its just because of different business and different company, because Junkers started a new firm to produce airplanes, while the original was still in its heaters, plumbing etc business. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On the website of the aircraft company, there is a list of aircraft from the J-1 to the Ju-160. There are bombers from the inter-war period but nothing that could be associated with the national socialists...

Grue_
04-11-2006, 04:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ouch http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

I just gave up my gas guzzling m3 for an audi diesel. It does over twice the mileage but why do all diesel engines sound like clapped out taxis? I want my m3 back http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

Treetop64
04-11-2006, 04:43 PM
This may be obvious, but I was wondering if the reason why (in particular) Germany built such tiny vehicles was because after the war, she no longer had the resources to build more substantial vehicles?

MLudner
04-11-2006, 05:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:

Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you think I'm a Nazi based on my opinion that big cars are an environmental disaster, you plainly have no idea what a Nazi is.

If you think I'm a Nazi based on my aesthetic appreciation of post war industrial design vs modern industrial design, then not only do you have no idea what a Nazi is, you are one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Interesting theory.

Let us see;
The Nazis believe in Regulated Market Economics.
Oops, so do you.

I believe in Free Markets.

The Nazis believed in the Rule of Man.

I believe in the Rule of Law.

Diametric opposition on my part so far, not so diametric on yours, though. The ignorance, you shall learn, was all yours.

I esteem individual liberty.

Did the nazis?

No.

Do you?

No.

Now, of course, all socialists are just variations on the same theme and not one socialist would be separate from any of the National Socialist beliefs identified above save for the belief of Communists in Statist Economics, which is where they diverge a few degrees apart.

Would you agree that free markets are "Plutocracy"?

Bandit.426Cdn
04-11-2006, 06:00 PM
Heinkel got into the small, economic vehicle biz also.

http://www.heinkeltourist.com/Images/Owners/A2Goldberg2.jpg

I've got a sidecar rig also, my 'idea' of economic ain't so economic though. A massaged Bandit 1200, hooked up to a heavy weight sidecar does not make for economy. I think it does 1 mpg better , with an out of control throttle hand, than my GMC Safari 4.3 litre minivan on average.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~wstrong/images/sidecar-done-2med.jpg

_______________

Bill
Now flying online as 'BANDITO'

luftluuver
04-11-2006, 06:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
I'm pretty sure some of them went to prison b/c of the whole slave labor thing </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, Willy did a couple of years.

..........

Check my sig. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kettenhunde
04-11-2006, 10:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Dornier </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Built their post war fortunes in the textile industry..

The family inheritance went to the grandson Iren Dornier who is currently piloting a restored Do-24 around the world.

http://www.do-24.com/multimedia.php?pageNum_rsRecentLoc...Locales=4&location=2 (http://www.do-24.com/multimedia.php?pageNum_rsRecentLocales=1&totalRows_rsRecentLocales=4&location=2)

http://www.do-24.com/crew.php?id=1

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Aircraft manufacture was completely forbidden in Germany by the Allied Forces, which forced the worldwide renowned aircraft manufacturer Dornier to look for a new field of activity after the war. The result was textile machines, initially shuttle weaving machines. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.lindauer-dornier.com/english/index.htm

All the best,

Crumpp

Friendly_flyer
04-12-2006, 02:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
Now, of course, all socialists are just variations on the same theme and not one socialist would be separate from any of the National Socialist beliefs identified above save for the belief of Communists in Statist Economics, which is where they diverge a few degrees apart. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you'll find that the definition of a few political categories have changed a bit since the 1930ies, MLudner. Claiming that anyone who wants a bit of regulation of the market for the sake of the environment is de facto adhering to an ideology similar to the national socialists of interwar Germany, is not quite up to your usual standards. It would be like claiming that all democrats are pro slavery and pederasty, as ancient Greeks adhered to those practices.

The only reason I find it prudent to answer your post is that you are usually a tower of reason and good education. Not so this time.

Badsight.
04-12-2006, 02:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bandit.426Cdn:
http://home.cogeco.ca/~wstrong/images/sidecar-done-2med.jpg (http://home.cogeco.ca/%7Ewstrong/images/sidecar-done-2med.jpg) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot ? that is no longer a Motorcycle !

as far as im concerned - the ultimate small car was made back in 1985 , City Turbo II

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/4509/hondacityturbo3wu.jpg

but i have since had the opportunity to thrash a Suzuki Cuppucino - exceeding well behaved , just about the best handeling car ive ever driven for four wheel drifting

StG2_Schlachter
04-12-2006, 03:45 AM
Long lives Volkswagen http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/06/abtgti05_03.jpg

Abbuzze
04-12-2006, 03:52 AM
Here some pictures of the Smart car after a crashtest versus a Mercedes E-class.

http://www.whnet.com/4x4/pix3/Crashtest_Smart_W210.jpg

http://www.whnet.com/4x4/Smart_crashtest.html

Beside, this is an example what Willy and Heinkel did also after the war.

Supersonic without Afterburner. Just 2 prototypes were build, but a nice looking plane I in my eyes.
http://jpcolliat.free.fr/vj101/images/v101_i.jpg

stathem
04-12-2006, 03:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bandit.426Cdn:
http://home.cogeco.ca/~wstrong/images/sidecar-done-2med.jpg (http://home.cogeco.ca/%7Ewstrong/images/sidecar-done-2med.jpg) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot ? that is no longer a Motorcycle !

as far as im concerned - the ultimate small car was made back in 1985 , City Turbo II

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/4509/hondacityturbo3wu.jpg

but i have since had the opportunity to thrash a Suzuki Cuppucino - exceeding well behaved , just about the best handeling car ive ever driven for four wheel drifting </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Badsight, in Europe that's a normal sized car http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif What is it, a blown Suzuki Swift?

I know what you mean about the Capucino..It's a shame they stopped making those so soon. I never got to drive one drive one but it was always on the wish list. I think the Smart Roadster comes close.

x6BL_Brando
04-12-2006, 04:32 AM
Meanwhile, from a secret research establishment near Tamworth in the UK, Britain unleashed their devastating response....
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/regalmk1.jpg

Edit: Oops, nearly forgot, nice outfit Bandit! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Easy on that twistgrip bro..... ride safe! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

stathem
04-12-2006, 05:22 AM
Hoo, an original Plastic Pig...

Aaron_GT
04-12-2006, 05:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
quote:
Originally posted by Vacillator:
If we're talking small cars, then of course there's always the Smart car with 700cc turbo Mercedes engine, not sure how these would go down in the US?



Just great until some minor ego in an SUV talking on the phone and eyes for bigger things
than the SUV only does something stupid into it.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Smart Cars are very safe. In fact they are safer than SUVs. They were designed from the outset to have crumple zones outside an impervious safety zone for the driver and passenger. Also with a short wheel base the axles provide part of the safety mechanism as it is likely that side impacts will hit one or both of the axles. If hit from the rear (where the engine is) the engine folds up underneath the safety zone, absorbing impact energy but avoiding intrusion into into the safety zone. Still any impact on any car (including an SUV) by another SUV isn't going to be pretty.

luftluuver
04-12-2006, 05:36 AM
With a Smart Car you don't have to buy a coffin, for you are already in one.

Abbuzze
04-12-2006, 05:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
With a Smart Car you don't have to buy a coffin, for you are already in one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you ever read a crash test report? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Airmail109
04-12-2006, 06:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:

Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you think I'm a Nazi based on my opinion that big cars are an environmental disaster, you plainly have no idea what a Nazi is.

If you think I'm a Nazi based on my aesthetic appreciation of post war industrial design vs modern industrial design, then not only do you have no idea what a Nazi is, you are one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Interesting theory.

Let us see;
The Nazis believe in Regulated Market Economics.
Oops, so do you.

I believe in Free Markets.

The Nazis believed in the Rule of Man.

I believe in the Rule of Law.

Diametric opposition on my part so far, not so diametric on yours, though. The ignorance, you shall learn, was all yours.

I esteem individual liberty.

Did the nazis?

No.

Do you?

No.

Now, of course, all socialists are just variations on the same theme and not one socialist would be separate from any of the National Socialist beliefs identified above save for the belief of Communists in Statist Economics, which is where they diverge a few degrees apart.

Would you agree that free markets are "Plutocracy"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe in free markets, regulated free markets governed by the rule of law.....theres no such thing as a "free market" otherwise drugs would be legal. There are different degrees of "free markets" - I believe that a government should be able to regulate what is sold for example if we want to cut carbon emmisions I think it is perfectly acceptable to pass legislation to force car manufacturers to produce cars that are more enviromentally clean.

Individual liberty? to what extent do you believe in individual liberty? Theres no such thing - your only as free as they let you be, should yo be allowed certain liberties if they infringe on other peoples liberties? Like should you drive a massive great big gas guzzling SUV, and take away my liberty/right to live without choking to death from pollution or being drowned by floods caused by global warming? My right to life.....

djetz
04-12-2006, 08:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
Interesting theory.

Let us see;
The Nazis believe in Regulated Market Economics.
Oops, so do you.

I believe in Free Markets.

The Nazis believed in the Rule of Man.

I believe in the Rule of Law.

Diametric opposition on my part so far, not so diametric on yours, though. The ignorance, you shall learn, was all yours.

I esteem individual liberty.

Did the nazis?

No.

Do you?

No.

Now, of course, all socialists are just variations on the same theme and not one socialist would be separate from any of the National Socialist beliefs identified above save for the belief of Communists in Statist Economics, which is where they diverge a few degrees apart.

Would you agree that free markets are "Plutocracy"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What the hell are you talking about?

Seriously, if you can quote me the place where I said any of the things you just accused me of saying, your little rant might be worth considering.

I said I think the car industry is bad for the world, and I said I prefer those designs to modern designs. Your conclusions about my politics based on those statements are - I'm sorry, but there is no other word for it - delusional.

You are constructing a straw man, assuming you know all about me, leaping to conclusions, and slandering me based on your own paranoid fantasies. If that isn't Nazi-type behaviour, I don't know what is.

Obviously you're the one with the political hang-ups and the desire to impose your politics on others - I never said a damn thing about free markets, the rule of law, or anything else in your rant.

Seriously: an apology would be appreciated. If you can't handle that (and I bet you can't) please go bother someone else with your delusions until such time as you grow up and learn to respect the opinions of people who may or may not even disagree with you.

x6BL_Brando
04-12-2006, 10:02 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

How did it go? ........, tomorrow the world!

also, "Tomorrow we'll be millionaires!"

Del Trotter - MD of TIT - Trotter's International Trading.

Does it need to get more serious?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/xmas_1993_02.jpg

Interminate
04-12-2006, 09:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
Interesting theory.

Let us see;
The Nazis believe in Regulated Market Economics.
Oops, so do you.

I believe in Free Markets.

The Nazis believed in the Rule of Man.

I believe in the Rule of Law.

Diametric opposition on my part so far, not so diametric on yours, though. The ignorance, you shall learn, was all yours.

I esteem individual liberty.

Did the nazis?

No.

Do you?

No.

Now, of course, all socialists are just variations on the same theme and not one socialist would be separate from any of the National Socialist beliefs identified above save for the belief of Communists in Statist Economics, which is where they diverge a few degrees apart.

Would you agree that free markets are "Plutocracy"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What the hell are you talking about?

Seriously, if you can quote me the place where I said any of the things you just accused me of saying, your little rant might be worth considering.

I said I think the car industry is bad for the world, and I said I prefer those designs to modern designs. Your conclusions about my politics based on those statements are - I'm sorry, but there is no other word for it - delusional.

You are constructing a straw man, assuming you know all about me, leaping to conclusions, and slandering me based on your own paranoid fantasies. If that isn't Nazi-type behaviour, I don't know what is.

Obviously you're the one with the political hang-ups and the desire to impose your politics on others - I never said a damn thing about free markets, the rule of law, or anything else in your rant.

Seriously: an apology would be appreciated. If you can't handle that (and I bet you can't) please go bother someone else with your delusions until such time as you grow up and learn to respect the opinions of people who may or may not even disagree with you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why? You really should take it all as a compliment.

Badsight.
04-12-2006, 11:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Badsight, in Europe that's a normal sized car http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif What is it, a blown Suzuki Swift?. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>its a 1985 Honda City Turbo II

714 Kg , 110 Hp & amazingly good brakes

its a real giant killer from 0 - 60 km/h , & with 2 basic mods the Hp jumped to 137 Hp with no parts exchanged . in racing in japan its 1200cc turbo 4 cyl gave 220 Hp with a governed inlet size

the Cuppucino so far is the best handeling car for speeds up to 100 Km/h that i have driven , not that powerfull but really responsive

about the Smart Car - for what they are they DO test good in crash testing , but like all these tiny grocery getters they will crush like a coke can at highway + speeds

edit : we didnt get the II model City Turbo in NZ , i had the 100 hp 1982 model - it gave me 61 mpg sitting on 120 km/h http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

polak5
04-13-2006, 02:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:



What the hell are you talking about?

Seriously, if you can quote me the place where I said any of the things you just accused me of saying, your little rant might be worth considering.

I said I think the car industry is bad for the world, and I said I prefer those designs to modern designs. Your conclusions about my politics based on those statements are - I'm sorry, but there is no other word for it - delusional.

You are constructing a straw man, assuming you know all about me, leaping to conclusions, and slandering me based on your own paranoid fantasies. If that isn't Nazi-type behaviour, I don't know what is.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

MLudner
04-14-2006, 11:53 AM
Not based on those statements alone. You have said more elsewhere.

National Socialism is a specific ideology based on economic and social policies based in the concept of regulated market economics. It is not necessarily a pejorative term. You did not understand my previous reply, I am not surprised.

You said I was a Nazi, I identified the falsehood of your statement by a short examination of my own views compared to National Socialist views.

The problem lies in the lack of appropriate education on the part of most people in this day and age who do not understand where systems delineate from one into another. The reality is, we fought the German National Socialists then adopted their system with only a few thematic modifications to periphery thinking.

It's like people who think they are living in a democracy when they are living in a republic in reality. It is because they like the name, but don't understand the reality. I understand this because once I thought so, as well. The separation lies in that my education continued and I was gradually disabused of the fallacies that once afflicted my thinking.

This case is the opposite, yet the same. You don't like the name, but you like the thinking so you don't want to be called by that name even though you follow the fundamentals of the ideology. To you it is the name that is curs-ed, but the thinking that is heeded.

A rose by another name still smells like a rose, just the same. Or; a rose called by another name is still just a rose, all the same.

It's not pejorative, just reality.

MLudner
04-14-2006, 05:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MLudner:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by djetz:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MLudner:


I believe in free markets, regulated free markets governed by the rule of law.....theres no such thing as a "free market" otherwise drugs would be legal. There are different degrees of "free markets" - I believe that a government should be able to regulate what is sold for example if we want to cut carbon emmisions I think it is perfectly acceptable to pass legislation to force car manufacturers to produce cars that are more enviromentally clean.

Individual liberty? to what extent do you believe in individual liberty? Theres no such thing - your only as free as they let you be, should yo be allowed certain liberties if they infringe on other peoples liberties? Like should you drive a massive great big gas guzzling SUV, and take away my liberty/right to live without choking to death from pollution or being drowned by floods caused by global warming? My right to life..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then, you do not believe in Free Markets; you believe in Regulated Markets.

I never said there was anything such as Free Markets in the world today, I just said that's what I believe in. Free Markets are dead and will remain so until the 3rd Incarnation of Civilization dies, which I don't think is all that far away (I calculate 200 - 250 years, and I may be over-estimating due to changes or shifts I cannot precisely predict).

FYI: The Rule of Law is when the laws rule over the men; the Rule of Man is when the men rule over the laws. A Free Market does not mean or imply an absence of laws, nor does Individual Liberty any more than the Rule of Man necessarily indicates anarchy and an absence of laws.

As Ayn Rand points-out:
There are two ways you can get people to do what you want:

You can use the bayonet (Force).

Or, you can pay them (Reward).

Socialism in all its variations uses the bayonet.

The Free Market method would be to bring it about through tax breaks and other rewards, backed by encouragement.

Individual Liberty stops where your actions will directly wrong someone else. This would be murder, assault, rape, theft, vandalism and other actions and / or decisions along these lines.

You are working along a false presumption: That global warming has been proven and that mankind is causing it if it is.

Global warming has not been proven and there is considerable reason to doubt of it just as there is to doubt that if such is the case SUV's are the reason for it.

Fair warning: This post is an English Comp test.

StG2_Schlachter
04-14-2006, 05:11 PM
Global Warming not proven? Could you elaborate that a little bit?

MLudner
04-14-2006, 05:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Friendly_flyer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
Now, of course, all socialists are just variations on the same theme and not one socialist would be separate from any of the National Socialist beliefs identified above save for the belief of Communists in Statist Economics, which is where they diverge a few degrees apart. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you'll find that the definition of a few political categories have changed a bit since the 1930ies, MLudner. Claiming that anyone who wants a bit of regulation of the market for the sake of the environment is de facto adhering to an ideology similar to the national socialists of interwar Germany, is not quite up to your usual standards. It would be like claiming that all democrats are pro slavery and pederasty, as ancient Greeks adhered to those practices.

The only reason I find it prudent to answer your post is that you are usually a tower of reason and good education. Not so this time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perspective versus truth. Truth is what matters to me. See, you will note that I did not call him an antisemite, nor employ the acronym Nazi (When I use that I am being pejorative, and I admit it's a fine line). I have no evidence djetz is an antisemite.

This, however, is just like trying to convince me that the US is a democracy. It is not, never has been, and hopefully never will be. Just as National Socialism identifies a particular social and economic system, democracy identifies a specific form of government. The misuse of the term just belabors the situation and forces us to heap one adjective after another onto various terms to differentiate already defined concepts from their redifined descendants so that we can use the words we want rather than educate ourselves in the correct use of the terms in the first place.

On an interesting note: Slavery has been defined as more than just the direct ownership of one person by another or others, but includes ANY condition in which FORCE is the means by which people are made to do things.

MLudner
04-14-2006, 05:39 PM
I have a question:

Why is it that in a case where I am personally insulted no one says squat to the individual (djetz is not whom I am referring to) who did the insulting and even later someone comes to his defense when I did not even insult him back (In fact, I had wished him a good weekend).

But, should I identify someone as a National Socialist (Which I did because I have no evidence he is a communist and he has said nothing that I have read to indicate thus) I get hit with an avalanche?

MLudner
04-14-2006, 06:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MLudner:
You are constructing a straw man, assuming you know all about me, leaping to conclusions, and slandering me based on your own paranoid fantasies. If that isn't Nazi-type behaviour, I don't know what is.

You don't. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Obviously you're the one with the political hang-ups and the desire to impose your politics on others - I never said a damn thing about free markets, the rule of law, or anything else in your rant.

It was not a rant. It was a comparison.

Seriously: an apology would be appreciated. If you can't handle that (and I bet you can't) please go bother someone else with your delusions until such time as you grow up and learn to respect the opinions of people who may or may not even disagree with you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You do.

"I hope that this idea is revived: city dwellers don't need huge 4-seater petrol-guzzling monsters."

How do you wish to accomplish this?

LEXX_Luthor
04-14-2006, 06:04 PM
Interestingly, the more extreme "socialist" police states, or the ones that were, today have the most extreme enviromental disasters.

Even more interestingly, the nations with the cleanest environments are the wealthy western nations with high population density and a well developed civil infrastructure.

LEXX_Luthor
04-14-2006, 06:29 PM
Best post war German design may have been the 150 bomber prototype. Its very modern looking, and quite B-47-esque.

~~&gt; http://www.legion.sp.ru/guide/air/b/150.shtml

This 150 webpage is BabelFish friendly. Use it.

3-view drawing (http://www.legion.sp.ru/img.shtml?img=/guide/air/b/150-4.gif&alt=%D1%F5%E5%EC%E0%20%F1%E0%EC%EE%EB%E5%F2%E0%20% AB150%BB)

MLudner
04-14-2006, 07:16 PM
First, djetz, you need to calm down and reread my first after brushing up on your English Comp skills.

Second, at myself, I need to turn on my anti-brain fart software.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

For not thinking before I replied.
The first person to call anyone a Nazi here was you, and were I petulant I would demand an apology.

I shall quote myself:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif
Yeah, saw that National Socialist propoganda coming before I even scrolled down to your post.
Sieg whatever, dude.

I did not say that you were a National Socialist - though I believe you are at this point, which is not to say I know everything about you, just that unless you can disabuse me of the notion [which you can] I shall so hold - I said I saw that National Socialist propoganda coming, which does not mean you are one.

I have nothing to apologize for, therefore.

LStarosta
04-14-2006, 07:27 PM
LOL Who saw that episode of South Park about those Hybrids and their increase in smug emissions?

LOLOLOL!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/images/1002/1002_thaaannks.jpg

MLudner
04-14-2006, 07:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Global Warming not proven? Could you elaborate that a little bit? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I will start here:

Why is Earth Day celebrated on 22 April? What cyclical natural occurances occur on that date that would give a basis for moving it to that date?

What day - and natural cyclical event of significance to the Earth thereon occuring - was Earth Day originally established on?

"Useful idiots will help us along our way."

LStarosta
04-14-2006, 07:31 PM
So tree huggers are Nazis because Earth Day is celebrated two days after Hitler's birthday?

I'm lost....

Interminate
04-14-2006, 11:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
I have a question:

Why is it that in a case where I am personally insulted no one says squat to the individual (djetz is not whom I am referring to) who did the insulting and even later someone comes to his defense when I did not even insult him back (In fact, I had wished him a good weekend).

But, should I identify someone as a National Socialist (Which I did because I have no evidence he is a communist and he has said nothing that I have read to indicate thus) I get hit with an avalanche? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can call me a National Socialist, I don't mind. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Kocur_
04-15-2006, 05:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Global Warming not proven? Could you elaborate that a little bit? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Global warming' is just about as serious as 'global freezing' (the offender was agriculture then: dust rising from fields was 'proven' to stay long high in the atmosphere, thus limit amount of solar energy reaching here), the theory, which in 1970s had status quite similar to 'global warming' in 1990s. To make it even funnier partially both were 'discovered' and popularized by the same people http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Both reflect highly human-centric and frankly stuck-up POV - such is supposing that we humans are able to affect global climate, as if volcanic activity and the sun werent zillions times more powerful. The latter handle it on their own and changed Earths climate many times before we arrived.

StG2_Schlachter
04-15-2006, 05:44 AM
But you can't deny an effect of human society on the enviroment. What about the holes in the ozone layer etc. ?

I am not an expert. I am curious.

Aaron_GT
04-15-2006, 07:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the theory, which in 1970s had status quite similar to 'global warming' in 1990s. To make it even funnier partially both were 'discovered' and popularized by the same people Wink </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Global cooling was linked with particulate pollution (Sulphur and soot based from coal burning, not from agriculture, allowing clouds to form, records of cloud cover on particular days being widely available for over 100 years, and more reliable than temperature records in many areas of the world.). The popular media seemed to conflate concerns about the potential cooling effect of this pollution with things other scientists were saying about the fact that a new ice age was 'imminent', by which they meant in around 10,000 years, and made it into a huge scare story. Later the sulphur-based pollution was targeted as part of efforts against acid rain. The effect is still considered to have had an effect between 1950-1980. See references to 'global dimming'. It is still in effect over places like the Indian subcontinent where sulphur-based pollution is still relatively high.

MLudner
04-16-2006, 12:05 PM
Well, at least Lstarosta tried; missed, but he tried.

The "tree huggers" are left of the National Socialists. This vein is about the Environmentalist Movement.

I left a hint: "Useful idiots will help us along our way." It's a famous quote.

Earth Day was originally established by honest Environmentalists with whom I have little disagreement on the Spring Equinox. If you're going to celebrate an Earth Day that makes eminent sense, for as the first day of Spring it represents the rebirth of the Earth.

So, what happens Earth-wise on 22 April?

Squat, that's what. Not one thing. Nada por nada.

BUT! There was an event on that day of vital significance to a certain political movement founded in the mid-19th Century in the year 1870 in Simbirsk.

Vladimir Ilyich Ul'ianov was born. Also known as the Butcher of Petrograd, most of you know him as Lenin, his nomme de guerre.

When you're observing Earth Day you're actually celebrating the birth of this tyrant:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ef/Lenin4.jpg/230px-Lenin4.jpg

The fact is that the modern environmentalist movement is the new Komintern.

That is why it was moved from the Spring Equinox to the 22nd of April.

Sorry, Lstar, but this nothing to do with Almost Schickelgruber. Thanks for trying, though.

"Useful idiots will help us along our way." - Vladimir I. Ul'ianov.

MLudner
04-16-2006, 12:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
But you can't deny an effect of human society on the enviroment. What about the holes in the ozone layer etc. ?

I am not an expert. I am curious. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right where I was heading next. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The Ozone Holes are a lie. Not the existence of the holes, mind you, but rather their occurance.

They are a natural occurance and have been there for billions upon billions of years since the formation of the atmosphere.

Those pictures the National Socialist and Komintern II propogandists show you; the ones labelled "1978" or some like year and "Present", you've seen those, right? So have I.

That's the lie.

The actual labels should read "Summer" then "Winter". They are a seasonal occurance caused by the atmosphere itself. The Ozone Layer is caused by a chemical reaction that occures in the upper atmosphere when Solar Radiation contacts the gases that compose it. That chemical chain reaction occurs where ever the sun's radiation is hitting the atmosphere, at all times it is hitting the atmosphere.

What does NOT happen at the Poles during the Winter?
Sunrise.
With the setting of the Sun in late Fall the chemical reaction that generates the Ozone Layer stops. The atmosphere is not sedentary; it moves. The winds and natural currents of the atmosphere then move the lingering ozone from that part of the globe. The Ozone Holes match the area of perennial darkness like a glove and the Ozone Layer continues to exist beyond the darkness. With the rising of the Sun in Spring the hole closes again.

It's nothing more than an on-going natural cycle.

Now, could the Earth's climate be changing? Yes. The Earth's climate has NEVER been stable, and it is not stable now. For eons now the Earth has been going through a series of intermittent Ice Ages - that means recurring global cooling and global warming - both before and since man. We are, in fact, at present in a warm period (almost certainly) between Ice Ages and looking at the average timing between Ice Ages in the past (as best science can tell) we are not (geologically speaking) far from the next.

Did you know the ice caps on Mars are melting? According to scientists they are. It's the Sun; that big, really hot thing in the middle of the solar system that according to Komintern II has nothing whatever to do with anything happening on the Earth.

Of course, Mars is farther from the Sun than is the Earth and the closer you get - one would think - the hotter it gets. Mercury says so, and Venus agrees ...... in fact, so does Pluto.

Someone needs to explain to me how indistrial pollution on Earth is causing global warming on Mars. Until you manage that; as far as I am concerned if the globe is warming - and the scientific jury is still out on that one - then it's the Sun.

djetz
04-16-2006, 01:00 PM
MLudner, since you seem to think you've "won" the argument 'cause I didn't really feel the need to explain my politics, here goes:

The Nazis believe in Regulated Market Economics.
Oops, so do you.

Where did I say that? Where did I imply that?

First up, as others have pointed out, NOBODY lives in an unregulated free-market economy. The good old USA certainly doesn't. I shouldn't need to give examples, they're obvious, and if you really need some, ask Mr Google, it's what he's there for.

My expressed wish was that PEOPLE, not govts, would wake up and realise that cars, and the automotive industry, and the oil companies are doing harm to everyone.

People power? Is that Nazism? Communism? No, it's a belief that PEOPLE - the individuals you claim to respect - are the source of power and the force for change. The exact opposite of the totalitarian ideaologies you claim to oppose, where change is imposed from above.

The Nazis believed in the Rule of Man.

I believe in the Rule of Law.

Diametric opposition on my part so far, not so diametric on yours, though. The ignorance, you shall learn, was all yours.

I believe that the law changes, including the Constitution that Americans think is the word of God. You might want to check into the Volsted Act, for instance, if you believe that the US Constitution (and its ammendments) are somehow perfect.

I believe that human rights are more important than laws. If a law deprives a person of what should be a right, then the law is wrong. I also strongly believe that having rights means you also have responsibilites. If you have the right to speak freely, for instance, you also have the responsibility to not talk nonsense. Free speech (again for example) does not apply to lies, as any country's libel laws will attest.

No one has the right to harm others. That must apply to corporations as well as individuals. For instance, in the UK, there was a famous case where MacDonalds tried to sue a bunch of annoying hippies who were passing out anti-Mac information. The result: MacDs lost, despite the multi-million dollar team of lawyers they had, because the facts proved that the annoying hippies were correct.

Me, I dislike annoying hippies almost as much as I dislike corporate apologists, but let's face it: they were proven correct in a court of law. I doubt this would have happened in the US, but I hope I'm wrong and that we can trust the law not to sell out to big money.

So, how does that prove that I don't believe in the rule of law - if it is applied honestly?

I esteem individual liberty. Do you? No.

Now THAT is where you owe me an apology. See my first and second answers for the reasons.

You slander me by stating that I do not esteem individual liberty. I believe that big corporations do not care for individuals and routinely do things that are harmful both to individuals and to the human race as a whole. I also believe that most govts are these days in the pocket of the big money corporations, which means that most govts will happily go along with practices that harm individuals.

If you honestly believe you can trust the oil industry, for instance, to always have your best interests at heart - well, I pity you. Monster corporations must be held accountable under the law - and those laws exist, whether they're commonly enforced or not - so if you believe in the will of the people and the rule of law, you must agree that they should be held accountable.

Neither the Nazis or the Communist dictatorships ever practiced true Socialism, and you know it. Well... if you don't know it then you don't know what genuine Socialism means. Since I infer that you are an American, not knowing what Socialism means is not your fault, it's due to what you might call an historical dialectic, if you had a sense of humour.

I am not a Socialist. My political beliefs, like most individuals, are not party-line. However, I believe that the countries that are more influenced by Socialist theories are better places FOR FREE INDIVIDUALS than the countries that are more influenced by right-wing capitalism.

Personally, I believe that a synthesis between the best aspects of Capitalism and Socialism - for want of better terms - is what we should be aiming for. I do not believe that leaving the law in the hands of those who can purchase it is the best way to achieve that goal. I believe that PEOPLE POWER - the power of the individual to decide for him-or-her self - is the way that improvements are made. If people know the FACTS, like in the MacDs case I mentioned - then they are free to make their own decisions.

So, I believe in truth. Not propaganda. I believe in people, not institutions.

If, after that, you want to call me a Nazi or a Commie... well, please yourself.

MLudner
04-16-2006, 01:08 PM
Who said anything about winning? I am out of time for this now, but I will say you failed to disabuse me of my opinions in that post, though but only strengthened them. I'll go into why later.

djetz
04-16-2006, 02:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
Who said anything about winning? I am out of time for this now, but I will say you failed to disabuse me of my opinions in that post, though but only strengthened them. I'll go into why later. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yawn. I await with bated breath.

I guess it's easy to strengthen the convictions of someone who's already made up his mind.

If you have to call me something, call me an Anarchist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist). It's the political label that's closest to what I believe. And it's all about the liberty of the individual. I included the link, in case you feel like learning something. Unlikely though that is...

Kocur_
04-16-2006, 02:51 PM
Anarchism has one funny thing about it. Bakunin was Okhrana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okhranka) agent http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

djetz
04-16-2006, 04:05 PM
I didn't say I am an anarchist, I said that if I have to be labelled, that was the closest one to what I actually believe.

There are about as many schools of "Anarchism" as there are people who have taken an interest in it. Which is one of the things I like about it.

I also like the fact that Nazis, fascists, communtists, AND capitalists all unite in the hatred of anarchists. Anyone that is hated by ALL of the world's authoritarian systems has to have something going for it.

Really, what I am, if anything, is a truthfulist. Propaganda and its apologists are bad for everyone. All govts are liars, and all control systems are bad. So maybe I'm a freedomist.

A hell of a lot of people, like comrade MLudner, think that if one side is wrong, the other has to be right. I think that both sides are wrong. I think that individuals are right, when given a free choice about what they want to do with their lives. As long as they accept that thier own freedoms must not take away the freedoms of others.

According to MLudner, that means I'm against individual liberty. I don't know why he says that, but I'm guessing it's something to do with the thing about one side being right that I mentioned.

All govts are liars, all govts are control systems, they all reduce our individual freedoms. Democracy works better than totalitarianism, but it has the rather serious flaw of still being a control system. Democracy is buyable, as is proven by the current leaders of "the free world."

I believe that society should help and protect the less fortunate, those that don't "contribute" economically, such as the mentally ill.

Democratically elected govts in our wonderful post-cold-war society have pushed these people onto the streets, causing misery for them and for the people that are harrassed by them. That's a lose-lose situation. It wouldn't take much of a change in the budget of any capitalist country to provide help for these people. And it would be, morally, the right thing to do.

The treatment of the unemployed and the homeless - and I have personal experience of both those conditions - is bad enough in my country (Australia) and it constitutes human rights abuse in the USA. Again, it would be both ethically right and not too expensive to fix these problems, as much as can be done.

The poor are not far away, they're not just in third world countries, they are right here.

There are people right here whose jobs have been exported to the third world. According to capitalists, they're "creating wealth" by paying them smaller wages than would be paid to working people in developed countries.

The only people they're "creating wealth" for is themselves. Go and have a look at a former industrial area in any developed country and you'll see how that's working out. You don't have to look very far to find unemployed and homeless people in the streets right here. I was recently one of them. Fortunately for me, I live in a country that has a system of social welfare - "socialism". That means I have a roof over my head, I will be able to get public housing (after an immense effort that still isn't over) and I have hopes of being fully employed in the future. I can even afford to buy computer games, though that has a lot more to do with my being able to find part-time work on occasion than than any govt assistance.

Tough luck, had I been in the USA. I'd be freezing my nuts off and searching trash cans for food. So don't tell me that socialist ideas are bad.

Govts that want to take away programs that help the helpless are bad. If they had their way I would still be wondering where I'd be sleeping tonight. So excuse me if I don't believe that capitalism is good for me.

The unemployed, people on govt benefits, are not bad, lazy, stupid, or anything else: they're individuals. Some are bad, some are good. They're - we are - not bad people, we're people who didn't, and often couldn't, get a break.

Capitalism works for the winners. Obviously. I don't believe that it is a bad system inherently, just that it's wide open to manipulation and abuse by the people who are good at snatching power. Or buying it.

The free market is not a bad thing in itself. When it becomes a tool for disenfranchising actual individuals, it is. Capitalism did not win over Communism, it simply proved more adaptable. That doesn't make it ethical or anything else, good or bad.

And exporting working class jobs - the sort of thing I'd be doing if I could - to the third world does not create wealth, it impoverishes workers right here, like me. It might be a good thing in the short term for workers in China, for instance, but I do not believe that "creating new markets" is always a good idea. The idea of a market for a billion new cars in China and India strikes me as suicidal, in fact. Apart from the massive ecological damage that would do, it would hasten the inevitable end of the oil industry.

The oil industry - capitalism in general - would be better off for its own sake, let alone yours and mine, if it found a better way of using what we have, rather than trying to "create wealth" by selling more of it. That is robbing the future to pay for the present. That's what the big capitalist corporations and their govt lackies are doing.

Creating a permanantly disadvantaged underclass by exporting jobs hurts everyone in the long run. And a hell of a lot of people right now.

But, you know, as long as Americans can accuse the unemployed of being lazy rather than being redundant, everything's fine, isn't it? Till they export YOUR job, and you can't find another.

Capitalism - or at least the US-style triumphalist version - is failing. It failed ME. I don't believe that "anarchism" is the solution, I believe that accepting personal responsibilities as well as demanding personal rights is the answer.

We have a responsibility to the people that are suffering, the people that are impoverished, and the people that are helpless. Especially if we helped make them that way. "God helps those who help themselves" is NOT in the bible, like many people believe. And it simply is not possible for many people. To insist that it is...

To blame the victim, well, that's pretty popular these days. And a lot cheaper than compassion and kindness, which the bible actually does recommended, the bible that so many people claim to believe in, particularly in US capitalist and govt circles.

Once again, I will state for the record: I believe in the freedom of the individual. Absolutely. I also believe in the obligation of society to protect those who cannot protect themselves, including those who cannot protect themselves from society. That doesn't make me a Nazi or a Commie. Freedom cannot be absolute, it must have an ethical basis, otherwise it isn't freedom, its sociopathy.

bazzaah2
04-16-2006, 04:15 PM
great post djetz. Hope you get yourself sorted out soon.

Ruy Horta
04-17-2006, 01:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
I didn't say I am an anarchist, I said that if I have to be labelled, that was the closest one to what I actually believe. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SNIPPED the rest.

Generally a very good post, can't say I agree to all of it, but at least on some accounts I couldn't agree more.

MLudner
04-17-2006, 02:35 PM
The US is not a Capitalist Economy, sorry. It has not been for almost 100 years now.

The US is a National Socialist State under a Judiciary Republic. (It was once upon a time a Representative Republic, but the Legislature, in its infinite cowardice, has long since surrendered its real authority and the Courts are now the real power over here)

Your post, despite RH's comments, reveals how utterly ignorant you are of how this country works. Do you really think we do not also rob Peter to pay Paul? This country has a massive welfare establishment with an astounding number of people looting their neighbors at someone else's gun point and giving nothing in return for what they have taken. If you were living here you would be one of them.

As far as winning this debate goes, you already have before even it began and I knew it going in. The National Socialist system rules most of the world now, and the world will slowly fade farther and farther to the Left as time goes by.

Congratulations! You have disabused me of my thinking that you are a National Socialist. You are more extreme than that.

I know you will perceive that as an insult, but it cannot be helped, I am afraid. I view myself as an extremist, for as a Jeffersonian Liberal I believe in things viewed that way by many who lack the education to comprehend them. You believe in individual liberty, but what you don't - and never will - understand is the very system you believe in (and I understand what your beliefs are now as you have finally given me the information on your beliefs that allowed me to understand that you are not a centrist, but an extreme leftist ... and it was not that link, I have not opened it because I am already thoroughly educated in political systems and theory and social constructs including anarchy in all its variations. You would be surprised at how well read I am) is antithetical to that concept. Pure Anarchists, frankly, make more sense; their views are consistent to achieving the goal, just misguided is most cases (Many of those who believe in pure Anarchy would never survive it and would stand less of a chance than a snowball dropped onto the sun in such a circumstance and it amuses me to no end whenever I see one of these types advocating Anarchy. I would probably be able to get by, because while I am nonviolent in my life I am well armed and capable of violence if the situation requires it however much I would dislike it).

Again (Why must I constantly repeat myself? Have English Comp skills really fallen that far?), I never said there was such a thing as a Free Market in the world today. Socialism rules to one degree or another from one end of the world to the other.

I wish to engage in an exercise of reason with you. I tried to begin this some time ago, but you failed to respond. Now, for the record: this is an exercise I already ran through on these matters many, many years ago.

Let us do our own version of Plato's Republic: How are we to establish your ideal state?

MLudner
04-17-2006, 05:22 PM
I have another question, should you deign in your yawningness to reply.

You are aware, are you not, that in order for your government to give you anything it first must take it from someone else?

This fact was what always kept me from accepting money from the government unless I had earned it by working for them (I was once in the US Army) as I do not want the bread that was earned by the sweat of another man's brow unless I earned it by serving him. I chose to live on Ramen noodles instead in those days.

And, incidentally, in this you were half right, half wrong:

"Neither the Nazis or the Communist dictatorships ever practiced true Socialism, and you know it. Well... if you don't know it then you don't know what genuine Socialism means. Since I infer that you are an American, not knowing what Socialism means is not your fault, it's due to what you might call an historical dialectic, if you had a sense of humour."

The National Socialists never intended to practice pure Socialism. They had the brains to know it would never work in the real world and were using a modified version that was viable (at best).

You are wrong about the Bolsheviks. They were true believers, including Dzhugashvili, and it was their highest and purest desire to acheive the Socialist Ideal in its purest form. They were fanatical devotees of Socialism.

Have you read anything by Ul'ianov? How about Bronstein? Kollontai?

Now, what's really funny is:
"Personally, I believe that a synthesis between the best aspects of Capitalism and Socialism - for want of better terms - is what we should be aiming for. I do not believe that leaving the law in the hands of those who can purchase it is the best way to achieve that goal. I believe that PEOPLE POWER - the power of the individual to decide for him-or-her self - is the way that improvements are made. If people know the FACTS, like in the MacDs case I mentioned - then they are free to make their own decisions."

Benito Mussolini said almost exactly that.

"Where did I say that? Where did I imply that?"

The above quote within the very post wherein you asked that. Your earlier reply, already quoted, for another. I could go on.

"So, how does that prove that I don't believe in the rule of law - if it is applied honestly?"

Answer:

"I believe that human rights are more important than laws. If a law deprives a person of what should be a right, then the law is wrong. I also strongly believe that having rights means you also have responsibilites. If you have the right to speak freely, for instance, you also have the responsibility to not talk nonsense. Free speech (again for example) does not apply to lies, as any country's libel laws will attest."

"I believe that the law changes, including the Constitution that Americans think is the word of God. You might want to check into the Volsted Act, for instance, if you believe that the US Constitution (and its ammendments) are somehow perfect."

No Americans think the Constitution is the word of God. We think it is the "Supreme Law of the land".

If even it's author thought it was perfect then why did he provide a means by which it could be amended? It's one of the great points to the Consitution: It can be changed! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif There is an actual LEGAL process by which the Constitution can be amended, thus changing it. ANYTHING can be added or stricken. The catch is:

You have to be able to get enough people to agree to the idea.

The Rule of Law holds that laws cannot be disregarded under any circumstance and must be heeded when in force until they are changed by a legal process established by law. If you disagree with an aspect or provision of law then it must be changed or removed legally.

Treetop64
04-18-2006, 02:12 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

...Um, at which point did this discussion go from talking about German postwar industry, to a fracas between Joe Leberman and Rush Limbaugh?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

Airmail109
04-18-2006, 04:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Global Warming not proven? Could you elaborate that a little bit? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Global warming' is just about as serious as 'global freezing' (the offender was agriculture then: dust rising from fields was 'proven' to stay long high in the atmosphere, thus limit amount of solar energy reaching here), the theory, which in 1970s had status quite similar to 'global warming' in 1990s. To make it even funnier partially both were 'discovered' and popularized by the same people http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Both reflect highly human-centric and frankly stuck-up POV - such is supposing that we humans are able to affect global climate, as if volcanic activity and the sun werent zillions times more powerful. The latter handle it on their own and changed Earths climate many times before we arrived. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your answer reflects both a self centred and frankly stuck up point of view.

Ice ages come and go over millennia, and for the past 8,000 years, the gradual end of the last ice age has seen a natural increase in worldwide temperatures, all scientists agree. Skeptics have expressed doubt that industrial activity is to blame for world's rapidly rising temperatures.

But records show that for the past 50 years or so, the warming trend has sped up -- due, researchers said, to the atmospheric burden of greenhouse gases produced by everything industrial, from power plants burning fossil fuels to gas-guzzling cars -- and the effects are clear.

"We were stunned by the similarities between the observations that have been recorded at sea worldwide and the models that climatologists made," said Tim Barnett of the University of California's Scripps Institution of Oceanography. "The debate is over, at least for rational people. And for those who insist that the uncertainties remain too great, their argument is no longer tenable. We've nailed it."

Barnett and other experts marshaled their evidence and presented it to their colleagues for the first time at a symposium here.

For the past 40 years, Barnett said, observations by seaborne instruments have shown that the increased warming has penetrated the oceans of the world - - observations, he said, that have proved identical to computer predictions whose accuracy has been challenged by global-warming skeptics.

The most recent temperature observations, he said, fit those models with extraordinary accuracy.

But a spokesman for the Bush administration -- which has been criticized for not taking global warming seriously -- was unfazed by the latest news.

"Our position has been the same for a long time," said Bill Holbrook, spokesman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality. "The science of global climate change is uncertain."

"Ice is in decline everywhere on the planet, and especially in the Arctic, " said Ruth Curry, a physical oceanographer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, "and there is large-scale drying throughout the Northern Hemisphere."

Ice cores drilled deep into the Greenland ice cap show that salinity of the ice at the upper layers of the cores has decreased sharply due to the incursion of fresh water draining from melting snows on the surface, she reported, and land ice and permafrost are in decline all around the Arctic. In the meantime, she said, measurements show that salinity of the ocean waters nearer the equator has increased as the rate of evaporation of warmer tropical and subtropical oceans quickens.

It may take several centuries for all the ice that covers Greenland to melt, Curry said, "but its release of fresh water will make sea-level rise a very significant issue in this century." In fact, she said, changes in the freshwater balance of the oceans has already caused severe drought conditions in America's Western states and many parts of China and other Asian countries.

Already, the physics of increased warming and the changes in ocean circulation that result are strongly affecting the entire ecology of the Arctic regions, according to Sharon L. Smith, an oceanographer and marine biologist at the University of Miami.

Last summer, on an expedition ranging from Alaska's Aleutian islands to the Arctic Ocean above the state's oil-rich North Slope, Smith said she encountered the leading elder of an Eskimo community on Little Diomede island who told her that ice conditions offshore were changing rapidly year by year; that the ice was breaking up and retreating earlier and earlier; and that in the previous year the men of his community were able to kill only 10 walrus for their crucial food supplies, compared to past harvests of 200 or more.

Populations of bowhead whales, which the Eskimo people of Barrow on the North Slope are permitted to hunt, are declining too, Smith said. The organisms essential to the diet of Eider ducks living on St. Lawrence Island have been in rapid decline, while both the plants and ducks have moved 100 miles north to colder climates -- a migration, she said, that obviously was induced by the warming of the waters off the island.

Another piece of evidence Smith cited for the ecological impact of warming in the Arctic emerged in the Bering Sea, where there was a huge die- off in 1997 of a single species of seabirds called short-tailed shearwaters.

Hundreds of thousands of birds died, she said, and the common plankton plants on which they depend totally for food was replaced by inedible plants covered with calcite mineral plates. Those plants thrive in warmer waters and require higher-than-normal levels of carbon dioxide -- the major greenhouse gas -- to reproduce, Smith said.

What more convincing evidence do we need that warming is real?

KIMURA
04-18-2006, 04:26 AM
back from self-displaying political blablabla to the topic.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

No one thought about Dornier? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

How to better things that are alredy near perfect? Today's Do-24 ATT "amphibious technology testbed"
http://www.airventure.org/2005/gallery/images/mon25/dornier.jpg

Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/YankeeAirMuseum2005/Highlights/AlphaJet11oClock.jpg

StG2_Schlachter
04-18-2006, 04:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
back from self-displaying politcal blablabla to the topic.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

No one thought about Dornier? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

How to better things that are alredy near perfect? Today's Do-24 ATT "amphibious technology testbed"
http://www.airventure.org/2005/gallery/images/mon25/dornier.jpg

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I saw this thing flying when it was visiting Hamburg, sometime last year. It's beautiful.

KIMURA
04-18-2006, 04:47 AM
found a good one....... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

http://www.ammersee-region.de/grafiken/sommer/g-Ammersee-Diessen-Dornier-24-1-400-Dsc03762.jpg

and
http://www.lth-online.de/fileadmin/bilder/Fairchild-Dornier-AvCraft/do24att.jpg

StG2_Schlachter
04-18-2006, 04:55 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

luftluuver
04-18-2006, 05:38 AM
What is with the radical swept backed tips of the Dornier?

Kocur_
04-18-2006, 07:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Global Warming not proven? Could you elaborate that a little bit? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Global warming' is just about as serious as 'global freezing' (the offender was agriculture then: dust rising from fields was 'proven' to stay long high in the atmosphere, thus limit amount of solar energy reaching here), the theory, which in 1970s had status quite similar to 'global warming' in 1990s. To make it even funnier partially both were 'discovered' and popularized by the same people http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Both reflect highly human-centric and frankly stuck-up POV - such is supposing that we humans are able to affect global climate, as if volcanic activity and the sun werent zillions times more powerful. The latter handle it on their own and changed Earths climate many times before we arrived. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your answer reflects both a self centred and frankly stuck up point of view.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wonder what is stuck-up and self centered about saying that natural forces are far more powerful than humans?
Climate is changing - no doubt. Anyone saying that we can STOP that - not so rational...
Btw: interesting read on data:
http://www.climatechangeissues.com/cci-research.php

WOLFMondo
04-18-2006, 07:59 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

You've got no idea matey. Ignorance must be bliss for you.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
04-18-2006, 09:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
I wish I could find a pic of the Messerschmitt sewing machine. Looks like a DB though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Always happy to help... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Low_Flyer/sewing.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Low_Flyer/ba_1_b.jpg

Treetop64
04-18-2006, 10:03 AM
Kimura,

That Doriner in the bottom picture, with the modern paint scheme, is one of the prettiest aircraft I've ever seen! I had no idea the Do-24 was so nice to look at.

Airmail109
04-18-2006, 10:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Global Warming not proven? Could you elaborate that a little bit? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Global warming' is just about as serious as 'global freezing' (the offender was agriculture then: dust rising from fields was 'proven' to stay long high in the atmosphere, thus limit amount of solar energy reaching here), the theory, which in 1970s had status quite similar to 'global warming' in 1990s. To make it even funnier partially both were 'discovered' and popularized by the same people http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Both reflect highly human-centric and frankly stuck-up POV - such is supposing that we humans are able to affect global climate, as if volcanic activity and the sun werent zillions times more powerful. The latter handle it on their own and changed Earths climate many times before we arrived. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your answer reflects both a self centred and frankly stuck up point of view.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wonder what is stuck-up and self centered about saying that natural forces are far more powerful than humans?
Climate is changing - no doubt. Anyone saying that we can STOP that - not so rational...
Btw: interesting read on data:
http://www.climatechangeissues.com/cci-research.php </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm seems that articles from Asia Pacific

Shame about this little piece of info


http://www.environmentaldefense.org/content_images/rg_oxley.jpg
Alan Oxley
Host
techcentralstation.com, Asia/Pacific
The Tech Central Station Science Foundation received $95,000 from ExxonMobil for "Climate Change Support" in 2003.

You couldnt have picked a more biased source.

Frankly your ignorance astounds me.

StG2_Schlachter
04-18-2006, 12:24 PM
Dear God, could you take this **** to another thread please ?! Can't one thread ever stay on topic.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif

MLudner
04-18-2006, 01:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

...Um, at which point did this discussion go from talking about German postwar industry, to a fracas between Joe Leberman and Rush Limbaugh?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

MLudner
04-18-2006, 01:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Dear God, could you take this **** to another thread please ?! Can't one thread ever stay on topic.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not if someone makes a politcal comment to which I felt obligated to reply. Part of point in this exercise that people keep missing I shall now spell out:

Stop doing that. I carefully avoid any political commentary on my own initiative here for this very reason and do this to point out that others should not either.

KIMURA
04-18-2006, 01:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
Kimura,

That Doriner in the bottom picture, with the modern paint scheme, is one of the prettiest aircraft I've ever seen! I had no idea the Do-24 was so nice to look at. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm far-off of being a Do-24 fan, but that a/c is as fascinating as the Consolidated PBY is. A really timeless design that looks good even in 60 more years.

Squizz meeeee (http://images.google.ch/imgres?imgurl=http://www.airventure.de/ila2004/Do_24/Dornier24ATT_Kabine.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.airventure.de/do24_2004.htm&h=616&w=920&sz=74&tbnid=TDjDAViiDbfZLM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=146&hl=de&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3DDo-24%2BATT%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG)

StG2_Schlachter
04-18-2006, 03:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Dear God, could you take this **** to another thread please ?! Can't one thread ever stay on topic.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not if someone makes a politcal comment to which I felt obligated to reply. Part of point in this exercise that people keep missing I shall now spell out:

Stop doing that. I carefully avoid any political commentary on my own initiative here for this very reason and do this to point out that others should not either. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you ever feel obligated to comment on a political statement of someone else again, you can write the offender some personal message any time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Why sort this out here? It has nothing to do with this topic.

Please settle your arguements via private messages in the future. Thank you very much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Regards
Schlachter

B2T:

Some short info:
http://www.dornier24.com/

Pics:
http://www.mfu.at/Do24.htm

Capt.LoneRanger
04-18-2006, 03:45 PM
http://lynx.uio.no/jon/gif/aircraft/fw190.jpg

http://www.autointell-news.com/News-2003/July-2003/July-2003-2/BMW-645Ci.jpg

Both powered by BMW http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

LEXX_Luthor
04-18-2006, 06:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
BBC climate change experiment cocked

Garbage in, garbage out ... By Andrew Thomas: Tuesday 18 April 2006, 13:23

THE BBC'S CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERIMENT started in February and almost 200,000 users around the World have signed up.

With supercharged computers winding down after two months of number crunching, now is perhaps not the best time for the boffins at Oxford University to discover that the data they built into the model is flawed.

Users, including hundreds of schoolkids, who were looking forward to completing their climate-change models in the next few days are now being asked to start again from the beginning, with corrected data. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

As you might expect, there is a lot of heat being generated over at the BBC's Climate Change Forum.

The scientists at the Oxford Institute for Extreme Cleverness confessed to a "major error in one of the files used by the climate model," here.

Project Coordinator Nick Faull, said the file had underestimated levels of man-made sulphate emissions and models had tended to warm up too quickly. The file error was "also responsible for causing models to crash in 2013 which is how we originally came across the problem," he said.

Faull claims that the data gathered isn't completely useless, but that there is 'no alternative' but to start models again from the beginning.

"It's a big disappointment to have to give you this news," he confesses.

With around 200,000 PCs running the experiment non-stop for two months, it looks very much as if the BBC experiment is making more of a contribution to global warming than scientific knowledge. <span class="ev_code_red">µ</span>


~~&gt; http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31073

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
hehe

MLudner
04-18-2006, 06:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Dear God, could you take this **** to another thread please ?! Can't one thread ever stay on topic.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not if someone makes a politcal comment to which I felt obligated to reply. Part of point in this exercise that people keep missing I shall now spell out:

Stop doing that. I carefully avoid any political commentary on my own initiative here for this very reason and do this to point out that others should not either. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you ever feel obligated to comment on a political statement of someone else again, you can write the offender some personal message any time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Why sort this out here? It has nothing to do with this topic.

Please settle your arguements via private messages in the future. Thank you very much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Regards
Schlachter


SALVETE,

I am afraid you miss my point a little. I'm trying to help stuff a cork in it is what I am saying.

For example, in this case, djetz could have said that he just really liked those kind of vehicles and thinks they're cooler than an arctic wind rather than that he thought others should have to drive them. Nothing political in that what-so-ever. He spoke publically, so why should not I as well?

Which is not to say that I do not personally enjoy the intellectual stimulation of a good debate. Always fun. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEXX_Luthor
04-18-2006, 09:11 PM
This would be way cool...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Put big springs on the front of each car and "Want to Accelerate" lights on top. When a car that is moving wants to stop, it looks for a car that wants to accelerate and runs into it. The energy and momentum are transferred. Small cars would tend to get more of a boost than they give, so this would benefit the energy conservative.

Small sports cars would tend to go faster than the average car.

tolly3, Feb 23 2002
~ http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Regenerative_20braking_20system_20for_20cars
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yog_Shoggoth
04-18-2006, 10:51 PM
It's nice to know that after all the discord between Germany and the UK they can now come together and make one of the best cars on the road. My 2004 Mini Cooper, to be specific.

Badsight.
04-18-2006, 11:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
I'm far-off of being a Do-24 fan, but that a/c is as fascinating as the Consolidated PBY is. A really timeless design that looks good even in 60 more years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>totally agree

StG2_Schlachter
04-19-2006, 01:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Dear God, could you take this **** to another thread please ?! Can't one thread ever stay on topic.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not if someone makes a politcal comment to which I felt obligated to reply. Part of point in this exercise that people keep missing I shall now spell out:

Stop doing that. I carefully avoid any political commentary on my own initiative here for this very reason and do this to point out that others should not either. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you ever feel obligated to comment on a political statement of someone else again, you can write the offender some personal message any time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Why sort this out here? It has nothing to do with this topic.

Please settle your arguements via private messages in the future. Thank you very much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Regards
Schlachter


SALVETE,

I am afraid you miss my point a little. I'm trying to help stuff a cork in it is what I am saying.

For example, in this case, djetz could have said that he just really liked those kind of vehicles and thinks they're cooler than an arctic wind rather than that he thought others should have to drive them. Nothing political in that what-so-ever. He spoke publically, so why should not I as well?

Which is not to say that I do not personally enjoy the intellectual stimulation of a good debate. Always fun. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't help to "stuff the cork" in it by continuing this discussion. Anyway... check your private topics, please. I am just trying to keep this thread clean http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Badsight.
04-19-2006, 01:58 AM
honestly , this discussion has been interesting - it hasnt degenerated into name-calling badly , mludner gets jumped on but he keeps his posts clean

StG2_Schlachter
04-19-2006, 02:09 AM
But not in this thread http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

I take it for granted that it does not end up in name-calling. We are adults, aren't we?

I don't care if the discussion was interesting, which is a matter of taste, but they can make their own political discussion thread and not come here and hi-jack this thread as they please.

Do i ask too much, if i ask people to conform with some basic forum etiquette? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif

Interminate
04-22-2006, 12:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
Kimura,

That Doriner in the bottom picture, with the modern paint scheme, is one of the prettiest aircraft I've ever seen! I had no idea the Do-24 was so nice to look at. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm far-off of being a Do-24 fan, but that a/c is as fascinating as the Consolidated PBY is. A really timeless design that looks good even in 60 more years.

Squizz meeeee (http://images.google.ch/imgres?imgurl=http://www.airventure.de/ila2004/Do_24/Dornier24ATT_Kabine.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.airventure.de/do24_2004.htm&h=616&w=920&sz=74&tbnid=TDjDAViiDbfZLM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=146&hl=de&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3DDo-24%2BATT%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why "far-off" or what does that mean?

At this point in history, Germany has the best designs for automobiles. Be it Volkswagon/Audi, BMW, Benz/Chrysler and Dodge showing marked improvement under Daimler direction, same with Bentley and Rolls, and Cooper, and Bugatti, and Lambo. Maybach too. The prices are higher but they are definitely better looking vehicles over all classes.