Espectro

Have you forgotten about CWC and RES already? I'm pretty sure BIS are aware of the general thoughts on the Arma campaign and I think they are fully capable of making a more story-driven plot. Too bad the people who made those campaigns isn't with BI anymore ;/

I wonder if it's BI who makes this. But as there are spelling mistakes on the screenshots - they probably are the ones behind it smiley Anyway, i'm not going to buy this, as I have already seen how crap BI campaign creation is and I would rather get new islands/campaigns/units from the community. You guys think this is the reason the tools havent been released yet?

I was merely using you as an example. Many of your posts are out of line and you have the warning level to prove it. Calling someone a "fanboi" is a deliberate provocation and it got I&C six months PR if I recall correctly. If you can't see the difference between a "fun comment" and a flame bait, then it should be your problem and not everyone else's. This is not about me being a "forum priest". I'm just helping the moderators prune this forum of disruptive people. If you have a problem with that, be my guest. "Live and let live" only works if all participants are capable of social interaction. Get my meaning? @Paul-Hewson: That's exactly the point. If BI released a patch that removes copy protection, Atari, 505 and the others would drop them like a hot potatoe and sue them like there's no tomorrow. Sure, but they COULD release a hotfix, so we don't have to download NO-CD cracks every time they release a new patch. This last one, I had to download the full DVD, as I couldn't find a decent crack byt itself. Thank god I don't pay for bandwith.

While I do trust my fair share of selected articles, I have seen the climate change myself. I think we all have (well, except for Baff1, who must be living in the third star from the right). You must be blind if you can't see it. So Red kite. Your point is, that you are more sceptical of the global warming issue, although you see it with your own eyes. You haven't really shown us anything that even remotely sugests that solar activity was the cause of global warming the past 35 years. As Walker said - theres a huge amount of energy building up - and it's doing so exponential. This energy comes out as wind in our athmosphear which means beatiful tornadoes coming your way. Why is the planet storing more and more energy? Due to CO2 being the 'battery' in the atmospheare. Of course there are other factors, but let's try and remain focused on the things we KNOW will make a change. I don't want any everyday tornado. Let's try and stop this, ey?

Well, of course if you are not going to believe readings, you are pretty hard to argue with. As stated earlier, the nature is complex, and even though climate changes occur, they might not be visible to your eye. Simply because we are at the beginning of this likely to be a disaster. In some areas, the changes will be more significant than others. That is the nature of local and global climate. It all depends on many factors such as how far you live from the ocean, what temperature that ocean is etc. But just because you haven't seen any floods lately, it doesn't mean there isn't a change. Sure, we don't REALLY know if it's as bad as we can predics, I surely hope not - and I don't REALLY believe that it's going to be the end of the world, but as they say - the worse scenario the more people will awake - people tend to be ignorant on those areas, especially if it's something that is going to hurt their wallet. But we really DO need to wake up. I don't really see what difference to trueth my recycling habits have? But I assume your habits are driven by your wallet and not your concern for the environment. This could be wrong, of course. I have read on the subject, and I know alot about closed environmental system as that is part of what I do (Health and Technology engineer), and I have earlier provided sources of my posts, but as noone else did it, it just felt like a waste of time. Also, what I have posted the past 5 pages is all common info on the net, and a fast search on scholar.google.com will help you alot. I do am sorry, though - I can't use your experience in 'local environment'. And neither can anyone else reading this thread. It's simply irrelevant in the discussion of global environement. It's not I who keeps bringing industry into the picture, if you read my past posts I will rather have kept it out of here. I still stand at the same point. Convential industry is crucial in the 3rd world countries for the survival of many people. But we need to find alternative energy sources in the 1st world countries decriesing CO2 and other pollution sources. The problem with Africa is, that the logistics isn't the same as in our countries. They simply doesn't have the choise of diversity. We have to aid them in that. That is why it's simply not enough to have trade with them. They also have to be independant. The western way of production line simply won't fit their environement. You can't centralize food production, as someday soon there will be a transportation blockage resulting in no food in larger areas. Africa IS different than our countries, so we have to deal with them differently. Once again, you didn't read my post. I'm not going to repeat myself. Read my original post concerning this. And if necessary, go to the website I provided as well, it's pretty interesting.

On the contrary I have addressed every single one you have raised. (And enjoyed doing so, thanks for sharing your input). What? You havent adressed a single argument the past three pages! When I tell you to look for signs of global warming, you refuse to achnowledge there is any, since your farmland havenøt changed the past 37 years - and since it haven't then it absolutely can't be a 'global' problem . As another argument, you say that in another 37 years, it doesn't matter anyway, cause many people have already predicted doomsday by then due to their religion - jeez. Now come on! I assume you are just a tad intilligent, and therefor surely know that there is no such thing as a predicted doomsday as per religion (as there is no religion - it's just made up bollocks). *Cough* - okay, here is a bet! I bet I can find readings showing the effects of human rape on the planet in your local environment. If you just give me an area close to you . Please do tell me, how would you define people who pollute unnessecary to get more money? There you go again, ranting on and on. Noone ever put up arguments that it was. But now that you mentioned it, it actualy does affect the climate. It doesn't affect the global climate much, though, so what you said is kinda irrelevant to this discussion? Are you trying to pull into shore, with that comment or is there any other explanation you brought it up? I'm sure your standard of living is good - but not everyone has it as good as you. And believe it or not. There ARE crime and poverty in capitalist countries as well! Yep, that's right. As in some countries there are people who believe it's every man for himself. Even though many of them have more than they can ever use. How incredible, ey? Sure many great things have been made in the name of capitalism - but I can also mention lots of lots of bad things done in the name of capitalism. Just think of the first 15 wars you can think of, and see for yourself). Yes, and the day we loose interest in those kinda products, the third world countries economy falls to the ground once again and were back as status quo. Jeez, talk about being a conservative capitalistic liberalist. This is such comments where I think I waste my time. You simply refuse to think about anything else than your little wallet. You say, money = freedom. Well, not for everyone That's one hell of a postulate! Luckily as it is a postulate, you need to give me some facts to back it up, as I can't see where you are getting this from - your neighbour or the local spirits hunting the farmland? Maybe even god himself? We could have saved so much more, if we hadn't been thinking about our own wallets that much. But congrats, you have now made Africa dependant on our food, medicin and chemicals. Too bad the infrastructure in africa is so bad, that most of the stuff we bring downthere isn't reaching whoever it was meant to reach, causing millions of lives each year. But why would you care? You get your few bucks, and the local baron lives like a queen due to corruption. Oh, hey! Capitalism just showed its ugly face again! You are right, money = freedome - for the few, and death for the majority. Anyhow, we are not going any further - as Balschoiw said, i'm wasting my time here. To sum it up: You say global warming is overrated and biased, and a rising CO2-emission is necessary for global economy. Furthermore, you conclude that you know all about how nature works and reacts, since you, your neighbours and your father have worked at a farm. I say it's not - but it's so much more complicated than just warming. CO2 affects our oceans chemical balance making some parts inhabitable for some animals. These changes will have an effect. Nature isn't as stable as you might think. Sure it's not going to change overnight, and it won't change dramatically over 10 years either. But CO2 have a large effect globally. Many people believe that it is responsible for the global temperature rise happend the last 30 years, some doesn't think so. But all agree on, that higher co2 pressure in the atmoshphear = higher co2 concentrations in our oceans disrupting the food chain. You say that there haven't been any global warming or any other man-made effect to the clima in your area the past 37 years. Fine, I'm not going to argue you. If you are blind and refuse to read articles etc. I assume the Earth is flat as well? As nothing ever rolled over your fields by itself? You keep bringing in the big fight: Industry vs environment A I said earlier (But I assume you didn't read it), it's not ALL or NOTHING. We can't stop the pollution-train instantly. It's a huuuuge proces, it takes years to stop it (decades) and the wheels on the economy-class is going to have to be oiled in the mean-time while we stop. *hint hint* But, you probably are going to ignore those arguments again, claiming to have adressed them all. Or you might even come up with new arguments slightly similar to these I have already presented, and start putting that into pieces. Please do not, it's a waste of your time . Cheers

I'm getting alot better fps now, and are able to use SLI. Only problem is, that Starforce fecked up, and I have to use an image file on the HD to bood the game (or a crack). Pretty awful that I have to do that, my DVD-RW drive is only 3 months old, and it works in any other game. But oh well, I guess that's the prize of having an unbeatable copyprotection (yea right) - you force legitimate users to use cracks to run the game. Forceware support doesn't answer my e-mails, so can't really be bothered any more about that. The good news is, that my DVD doesn't get scratched

Do you even know what a hybrid car is? Yes it is yet another brilliant moneymaking scheme and vote winner from our famed government funded scientists and their political golf partners! A hybrid car can use 'fossil fuels' for the engine or it can use 'fossil fuels' for generating the electricity that power the electric motors! .... What a brilliant way to save the world! .... Over and out! So you dont think that driving 50 miles per gallon versus 10 is going to make a difference? Over and out. Lots of small diesel cars get 50 - 72 MPG and they get better acceleration and are a lot less costly to produce. Then there is the environmental cost of manufacturing the batteries and also carting them around! You say versus 10 mpg? For your information I drive a 3.9 V8 Land Rover Discovery that has been converted to run on LPG. Even when I run this brut on petrol I still get more than 20mpg on a run. And yes I need a powerful 4x4 for towing heavy trailers so don’t start giving me all the SUV drivers shit! So youre saying that hybrid cars aren't as economic as new diesel cars? Dude, your getting out on even deeper water...

Do you even know what a hybrid car is? Yes it is yet another brilliant moneymaking scheme and vote winner from our famed government funded scientists and their political golf partners! A hybrid car can use 'fossil fuels' for the engine or it can use 'fossil fuels' for generating the electricity that power the electric motors! .... What a brilliant way to save the world! .... Over and out! So you dont think that driving 50 miles per gallon versus 10 is going to make a difference? Over and out.

We made a list of all the things that doesnt add up on our website: http://armedassault.eu/forum....=#post_

Yep I didn't thought it was possible - but BIS actually found a worse publisher than good old codies.

I was very surprised - I actually dont see any performance hit on my machine. It dropped from 35 fps to 33 fps, and I even launched 3 at a time. I'm using 2*7600gt SLI, and a 3800+ x2.

On the contrary! Baff1 has thrown in some pretty significant arguments against upsetting the economy as a result of taking drastic action to cut man made co2. I haven’t yet seen anyone try and counter debate his reasoning, only continue to throw the same old stones over and over! Putting up a few wind farms is fine as is experimenting with other means of generating electricity. But don't believe for one minute that this is going to have any significant impact on overall co2 emissions! What about transportation, the steel industry etc? Will we be having solar powered aircraft or wind turbine steel furnaces? Take a look outside your window (if you live in a city) how many cars, busses, trucks, trains, planes are travelling every minute of every hour of every day? Think about it! If you seriously want to cut our emissions to any significant level it is going to take a lot more that the initiatives of a few topographically fortunate countries in setting up wind farms to help with electricity production. Like Baff1 said if we really want to cut co2 significantly (and that is the only chance of it having any effect) we would need to take very drastic action that would not only cripple the economy but our whole transportation and production infrastructure! And even then after all that there would still be no guarantee that doing so will have had any affect whatsoever on the (ever) changing climate. So we would be both economically ruined and environmentally ‘buggered’ with no chance of us ever helping ourselves out of it! ....So much for those columns and rows! No no no no no, and no! You and Baff1 are aimply ignoring all our arguments! Are you guys reading what I do? You have some kind of filter in your browser leaving out most of our valued points? You even take the liberty to qoute us out of contexts arguing against our points in a simple biased method - come on, now, let's be fair! Dude, you sound like my old gf arguing like that! (No offence, she was pretty hot - but damn annoying in any discussion). Noone said that we are to cut CO2 emmision to zero. Reducing CO" emmision isn't the same as ringing full stop for anything mechanical. Of course we need transport, of course we need power, of course we need steel. Are you completely ignorant, or do you think we are so, when you bring in those pathetic arguments? It's all political, and reducing CO2 is alot more affordable in the western countries than you seem to understand. Windpower, solarpower, tide-power etc. is all alternatives that can aid the power-suply. Ordinary fossil fuel cars are already being replaced to hybrid cars in some parts of Asia with a benifit for both enviroment and the local economy. Why not here!? As said, in 2020 75% of the power in Denmark will be created using wind. Will we still be producing CO2? YES, of course we will. But we need to go after cutting it down, so the planet can cope with it using its natural buffer systems. Baff1 - the third world doesn't need to get all it's food from the western countries - you sound like the average capitalist. Instead we should focus on developing those third world ountries making them able to produce their own food. Afterall, the population is incriesing and we need every inch left of it, to produce food. Why not start now?!

37 years is a very very very small timescale when it comes to global climate. I've been alive for 24 years, and I have seen changes due to global warming. The past 11 months, we have had 8 heat records in Denmark - which means that is the highest average temperature per month since we started meassuring in 18xx. If you were fishing for craps you would already have noticed the higher CO2 pressure in the oceans. Their shells are getting thinner, which means they are more and more vulnerable to predators. That is why craps is getting more and more expensive. Just because global warming or CO2 pollution isn't visual at your farm, doesn't mean it isn't real. Here in Denmark, all the vegetation started 1½ months earlier than normal - never seen before as long as anyone can remember or have written down. They even say that at this climate here, we can begin to grow wine in the lands of Denmark. That's okay, but too bad for those farmers whose crops isn't suitable for the climate anymore. As for the economy. I don't feel any need that the economy in western Europe needs to rise. We have quite a good time as it is now, it's in the poor countries that money is needed as that is where the problem lies (which you would have understand from my previous post if you read it). We have to bring down CO2 pollution in the Western countries emmidiatly. This can be done by alternative power. In 2020, Denmark will be powered by 75% wind energy. and the rest is Bio fuel. If Denmark can, so can your average other western country. We HAVE to take care of our planet. I find it pretty sad that in most countries nowadays, you can't drink the water directly from the pumps, but you have to use chlorine and other stuff to sterilize it. In Denmark, more and more pumps are being shut down due to pollution from the farmers, as they keep overspraying their fields. To sum it up. Economy isn't everything, and we can easily maintain status quo in the Western countries and decrease CO2. It's the third world countries where we can incriese CO2 levels, until they have a suitable standard of life. Then we can decrease it again in those countries.

Does it beep or anything when u turn it on? Try removing one of your memory blocks. If that aint working, move ya printer to the other computer, and move ya hd with it as well.

Most of our resources are not from poor countries, and countries that trade with us are wealthier than when they do not. 1st world, 2nd world, 3rd world classifies countries by the amount of trade we do with them not by their wealth. By strange co-incidence the third world countries (i.e. those we trade with least), also happen to be very poor. Western companies aren't destroying the enviroment, they are creating it. Terraforming it, if you like. Chinese people aren't starving because we are stealing their Iron ore and oil. What total nonsense. (They are major importers of both, and we are major suppliers). In the last ten years China has brought 300 million of it's population out of poverty. That is a number of people equal to the population of the U.S.A. or the EU or the entire continent of Africa. This isn't an ancient culture or enviroment destroyed. It is ancient culture saved, an enviroment capable of supporting it's population created. Our buying of Chinese materials and goods has significantly contributed to their economic expansion. All those cheap clothes you are buying aren't exploiting them, they are employing them. You won't see China embrace enviromentalism. You think it saves people from poverty, but the Chinese know better. And they really know about fighting poverty. Industry is what has been saving them, big, global, polluting industry. Saving the planet. Day after day, year after year, century after century. You won't catch the poor embracing enviromentalism. Only the Rich. Japan, Western Europe, California. Those that can afford the fashion. Where are these poor people enviromentalism is saving, how come they all point blank refuse to play ball? Don't they want to be saved? Answer: not by you they don't. De Beers. De Beers bought the land. Hungry people bought food with the money. De Beers is the single biggest employer in the country. In fact, it's the only big employer in the country. Many hungry people buy food with their pay checks. In the rest of the country there is much depravation and the competition for jobs at DeBeers is very high. People walk hundreds of miles on the off chance of getting a job there. Every occidental diamond wearing woman is sponsoring the poor in West Africa. The global economy is such that all you have to do to save the world is go shopping. All you have to do is be greedy and buy as much as you can. Be a greedy little consumer. Buy Chinese clothes, African Diamonds, South American Coffee. Eat chocolate, drink wine. Smoke. Fill your car full of petrol. Buy your daughter "My Little Pony". Help create sustainable industry in poor areas by giving them a market. But oh, no. You want them all to shut down their mines. Some guy at the top is earning more than some guy at the bottom so you want it all to stop. Shall we make DeBeers give the mines to all the local Bushmen? Do you think Bushmen know how to run an international diamond trade? Do you really want to risk it going bankrupt and all those African's losing their jobs? While we are at it, lets turn off their coal power generators and embrace enviromentalism. After all, if the richest people on the planet can afford the alternatives, why not the poor? The poor don't need friends like this. They too would be better off living in Waterworld. You are telling us to forget our "fantasy disaster" - but all I see from your recent posts is polluted imagination if you wish. It's pretty naive to think that global warming isn't real weather human created or not - it is real, we see that from readings. The problem is, that CO2 will incriese that global warming. Not only that, but global warming will also incriese CO2 levels making the oceans inhabitable. That means billions of people dying from hunger. The main issue is, that CO2 levels, due to (mainly) the two mentioned feedback systems, will incriese exponentially making it impossible for us to stop in not many years from now. Also, you seem to think that we feel that we should simply ban all CO2 emmisions in all countries. But the main issue is, of course, to lower CO2 emmisions globally while maintaining a stable economy in all those countries. It's not something that will happen overnight, as we have to find alternatives that are costeffective. Surely you agree that the first place to look for decriesing CO2 is in this western world, and that is why we need political will to do so in this world. Too bad many of the world leaders are more concerned about economy than the planet, and simply buy co2 qoutes from third world countries, limiting their industry capacity while the western countries dont have to use money on researching and building a capacity of alternative energy.

I haven't questioned all the good things industry gave us. But you haven't really argumented why industry=co2? Using alternative power, can actually be cheaper than using fossil fuel. If you read my earlier post concerning the italian researches building a kite-driven turbine. That system can produce energy at 1/30 of the prize of normal fossil fuel plants. It's all about politics, though. Oh, I just found this on break.com Very simple, but quite interesting. Please do comment it if you have any arguments against it http://www.break.com/index/tough-to-argue.html

I haven't questioned all the good things industry gave us. But you haven't really argumented why industry=co2? Using alternative power, can actually be cheaper than using fossil fuel. If you read my earlier post concerning the italian researches building a kite-driven turbine. That system can produce energy at 1/30 of the prize of normal fossil fuel plants. It's all about politics, though. Oh, I just found this on break.com Very simple, but quite interesting. Please do comment it if you have any arguments against it http://www.break.com/index/tough-to-argue.html

Sorry but this is expert opinion based on zero actual experience again. And it comes from all the same people who have reliably got everything else about the enviroment wrong. (My income comes from my financial investments, not my farmland). Fishermen make more money than me, but they are all pretty pissed off with enviromentalists telling them about fish stocks too. It's not just farmers that dicked around by enviromental science graduates. I also live in a very densely populated area of the world below sea-level. All the land here was reclaimed from the sea in the fifties using Dutch technology. The irrigation infrastructure was again radically overhauled in the 80's bringing an end to the previously seasonal floodings. Mrs Baff lives in Osaka. On a site that was previously the sea. They are day by day, dumping more and more of their mountains into the sea and building on them. For more marvels of man-made living space over sea-level, check out what they have done in Dubai. Lowering CO2 levels isn't the only solution and it's by no means the easiest or most efficient. I far prefer the tried and tested models used here and in Holland and even the new experimental techniques in Dubai and Osaka to anything as obviously unworkable and completely unproven as "Global CO2 reduction". It's a bit of a poke in the eye to common sense if you ask me. I might add that the advances to living space, food production and landmass in this country since the age of industrialisation is both not only marked and pronounced, it is of absolute record and has vastly outstripped any of the adverse effects of Global Warming in that same period. Global warming has had no noticeable effects in this country in the last 200 hundred years at all and any measureable effect is both tiny and hotly disputed. Unlike CO2 producing Industrialisation which has trebled the population, turned unuseable land into useable land, doubled the expected age, cured all most all diseases....etc etc etc and is continuing to do so to the very day. As I see it, the science (as yet) does not provide the answers.This is a faith decision only. I put my faith in Industry. It has a proven track record that I can trust. Well, the industry comes from science, mate . Of course the global warming haven't had any effect on your belowed land, as it has hardly started yet. We are worried for the future, not the past. Noone ever said reducing CO2 will be the final answer to all our prayers, you might wanna read some of the threads inhere again. But lowering it, makes the climate/ecology more stable to its current form. It does takes thousinds of years for the world to stabilize after such an enormious factor has been presented in the system. Again, you are not looking at the bigger picture. The more acid we put in our oceans, the more the chemical components of it will change. That means that some animals in the oceans arent able to live there, and others will have a better time living their than now. It's very hard to say which species is gonna profit from higher CO2 levels in the atmosphear and what species will suffer. But don't you feel a bit worried about the fact that we are making this world into a "trial and error" experiement? Let's hope we wont fail our first attempt when changing the entire ecology on the planet . Studies also show, that against popular beliefs, more co2 levels in the atmosphear is not favorable for vegetation leaving us with one less otherwise trusted buffer machanism. Higher CO2 levels has a huge impact on the chemical composition of our oceans, which will have a tremendous effect on the lives of the planet. Not to mention that it also incrieses the heat absorbtion capabily of the atmosphear and thereby rise the temperature of it. I don't know why you bring the effects of the industry into the discussion? Aren't you aware that there are alternative ways for the industry to get their power? It's not like we say "Hey! We dont want so much co2 - confiscate them cars and turn of all powerplants!". It's almost like you believe that industry=co2? It doesn't .

Yep, but let's try to avoid that, yes? Baff1 One thing is local veg and animal regulation. Another thing is a international regulation such as CO2 pollution. Sure thing that nature will put itself into balance, but it takes thousind of years for it to do so. Not much time for a planet, but pretty long time for a species such as ours. As it is now, we produce too much co2. The planet can simply not cope with it all using its current buffer systems. This leaves us with unhabitable oceans. As a lifestock and crop - man. You are in for a nice income, but for the people who live of the oceans, they are probably pretty pissed.

Great patch BI! The game looks so more streamlined now! I love the menu and armory, very nice! Major performance incriese, I still can't use SLI in ArmA, any ideas? One problem though. I cannot start the game with my CD in, as it cant find my dvd!? Whenever it checks for my DVD it just keeps reeding it, but if I eject the dvd, the game starts!? So I can only play the game if my DVD isn't in the drive? Is that on purpose? I have the czech version. Only tried it a few minutes in MP, and we all had small intervals of about 10 seconds where all players had about 2 fps, and then it incriesed again. As said, I only played in one server, so it might be that particular mission or server. It was a Bezerk map. Cheers!

Water vapoir haven't incriesed the past 30 years as opposed to other greenhouse gasses, such as CO2. So water vapoir is a constant, something else is shifting the balance. Noone really knows what to do, and which changes are to be made. Perhaps nothing is possible, but we have to try. If we keep doing what we are doing now, CO2 will incriese exponentially as the ocean co2 buffer become saturated. Then the small fishes wont be living there, which means that eventually the bigger animals die on the land.

Lol I can think of several even more pointless threads around here And why would the mods give him a PR just for starting one thread? It's not like he is spamming or anything.. Talk about wearing small shoes... The last comment was meant for those asking mods to give him a PR, not directed at Matt

It's not that simple more fish > more bigger fish more bigger fish > less fish

Hubert Reeves is also a stupid redneck? and it's true, the polar bear is in danger. if this specie disappears, that would be a huge loss for us. but animals are not the only ones to be in danger. i take an example; the people of the Tuvalu islands undergo increasingly violent floods, and the level of water goes up in an alarming way. this is the same thing for the Kiribati islands. 2030 if nothing change 28% of the species (plants and animals) will have disappeared. 2100: maybe our specie. Who in the world cares for polar bears? I feel, bad for them, I do... BUT! You, me, and no-freakin-body can save them... And with all due respect, I don't think you can adopt these creatures or else you might find yourself missing a head... Finally, Why would you care for living? What do you think will happen afterwords? Nothing... No more misery... No more anything... Even if this crap is true, those who gave their hearts to Jesus Christ will be raptured, and brought to heaven amidst the peace, and safety, while the world burns to the core... This ought to imply that I think that this whole deal won't affect me, because I'll be in heaven... And the world won't ever burn to the core... Now the polar bears, next the fishes in the oceans, then people in African cant fish anymore, they die of starvation etc. It's not about the polar bears, it's about the global ecology.