Camelbak Octane LR for me – the bladder is on your hips rather than back so it doesn’t slosh up and down, but it’s much more comfortable than a pure hip belt. Comfy, light, wicks well and you can stuff a wind proof or whatever in it

Not personally tried it, but the 20mm 1.7 is generally regarded as one of the best m4/3 lenses and worth the extra money.

No they don’t say out loud they are superior but what you don’t want to see is the assumption of superiority that underlies all abrahamic faiths. All that emphasis on a sinner repenting, the drive to convert, the assumption that morals come from god and without a belief in god one can have no morals, the belief they have a right and a duty to spread the word. Its all based on the assumption that to be a believer is to be a better person than an unbeliever.

Erm, not quite. Well, not really at all.

“Emphasis on sinner repenting” – one of the absolute core belief of Christianity is that there is NOTHING that WE can do to make ourselves better in the eyes of God. So no amount of repenting makes you a “superior” person

“Drive to convert” – I’ll agree that most Christians would love to share their faith, but this is very rarely now done as a ‘concersion’ drive. The vast vast majority of churches will use things like Alpha courses etc to invite people to learn more about Christianty. If someone chooses to accept an invitation OF THEIR OWN FREE CHOICE, you can hardly say that is any different to inviting people to a lecture on Darwinism.

“only a believer can have morals” – your right in your first statement that most Christians would believe morals come from God, but it is absolutely incorrect that they think you can only be moral if you are believer. That is clearly evident in the world and really requires no further discussion!

Do some Christians believe they are ‘superior’ to others? Sadly, probably yes. Is it a basis for the entire faith as you keep claiming? Absolutely 100% not. I realise I’m a touch biased ere, but I honestly can’t see how it would be possible to think that if one has done enough research to thoroughly dismiss the religion.

You can use an Airport Express to allow Wifi printing to any printer. OK, it will add another £50ish on, but it does mean if you currently have a printer you can make use of AirPrint without having to buy a new one. Can stream audio to it as well.

Cougar, I think it probably comes down to a definition of ‘respect’. In terms of expecting ones views (religious or otherwise) to go completely unchallenged and be ‘untouchable’, then I’m 100% with you in that this should never e te case. If you strongly believe something then being challenged on it shouldn’t really be a big deal. However, in terms of expecting ones views (religious or otherwise) to be allowed to be expressed, even if every listener (or reader) dismissed them instantly, then yes I do think that should be expected. I expect to be able to say ‘hey, I’m a Christian’ and, if they don’t agree, for other people to go ‘great, I think your wrong, but fair play if that’s what you believe in’. More than happy , and fully expect, to then be challenged on WHY I have that belief, but NOT on the fact I have that belief in the first place.

[edited for a should instead of a shouldn’t!! stupid iPhone….]

Underneath, a Mazda 2 is basically a Fiesta so it’s more of a styling choice than mechanical. Good call though – broadens the options!

I’ve got a Citroen DS3 and it’s great – would add that to the list.

Looks good, quality is brilliant (forget Citroen past, the DS range is genuinely good), and great engines – the 1.6 petrols are the same units as in the Mini, developed by BMW and built by PSA. The diesels are excellent too. If you are considering a Mini then it would spec out very similar but for less cash – it isn’t quite as sharp in handling, but it does have a better ride quality. Loads of reviews out there and all are positive.

Fair enough points, but why the need to tell them they are “utterly stupid”? Why wouldn’t a polite but firm “thankyou, but I’m not interested” work – any JW’s I’ve ever had knock on the door, when told this are very polite and leave you to your peace. If they really won’t shut up, then just say thankyou and close the door. Job done. No real need for the belittling of them even if you do think they are stupid.

yeah but you don’t burn in hell for eternity if you choose to run SRAM shifters. Mores the pity.

The UK faithful not being to fussed again, used to be a bit more forthright about evangelism tho in the past if memory serves.

Sorry I seem to be having a pop at your posts a lot, not intentional, just the last thing I read, short attention span and all that

Haha, no worries, wasn’t taking it at as pops at all – very valid arguments, so just all part of the discussion on here(/argument/ranting/descent into chaos…).

I’ll agree that probably wasn’t the best analogy in the world but hopefully you sort of got the idea I was trying to put across! :S Basically, I think Christians have as much right to put across what they ‘do’ as any other group do. It’s when putting that information across actively intrudes on peoples lives that it starts getting a bit ropey. Having a banner or poster up, or sticking something on a website or in a paper or even on TV/radio can hardly be constituted as forcing something on the population!

There is a difference between telling people about something and allowing them to make an informed decision about it, and forcing it on them.

I agree most churches will do some form of evangelism and in some cases this does mean the annoying door knockers or street shouters but again, that is a tiny minority of what most churches do. The majority will simply advertise what is going on in the church, Alpha courses etc and allow people to choose to come, or not. The rest is just people chatting about it with friends, colleagues etc. Not really different to chatting about how you find brand X of mountain bike kit better than brand Y.

Scuzz
Hammer/Nail interface

+ a lot

Let’s avoid ranting at people in the former category as if they were in the latter.

In the same way that a tiny tiny tiny minute, almost invisible fraction of Muslims are of the terrorist Jihad sort, a tiny tiny tiny minute, almost invisible fraction of Christians are the “God hates Gays, burn in hell” sorts. Sadly, it is these microscopic numbers that are given all the press and so the world views the religions as what these people portray.

True and proper Christianity, as would be applied to the VAST majority of Christians out there, is not about doing things to gain favour with God, it is not about seeing yourself as above others, it is not about being intolerant to homosexuals or different races or whoever, it is not about pushing your ideas and beliefs on other people. It is quite simply about living your life caring for those who need it, loving whoever you meet and interact with, and just generally being decent. Which is also the same as the VAST majority of people on planet earth. Which kind of confuses me as to why there is such vitriol poured out on Christians some times?

On top of that Christians have the belief that we have a God who is looking out for us and helping us and cares for us and so there isn’t anything in this life that we really have to worry about. Again, this is sometimes ridiculed as being a ‘crutch’ to lean on when things are bad. So if I carry on as normal and am not fazed by things such as potential redundancy at work, financial trouble, illness, death etc, that is a bad thing? It doesn’t mean those don’t cause me problems, of course they do and as much as anyone else, but for some reason the fact that I might be able to not get stressed and worked up about it (and caveat here that of course there are non-christians who do the same) is deemed a bad thing? It isn’t ever meant by anyone as an ‘ooh we are better than you’ sort of thing, that’s just our belief and you know what it is a great comfort to know it when times are hard.

Sorry for the slight thread derailment, just sticking it on the tracks as I finish. Just wanted to try and tidy up some misconceptions that people have.

(genuinely without wanting to hi-jack the thread and so please don’t think I am, but just want to clear this up a bit….)

Have you Edukator?

The same book in the bible which says homosexuality is immoral is the same book which says you can’t eat pork… Deuteronomy by the way.

Edukator I’m also not suggesting that your are saying it’s immoral. I am saying that it is amazing how Christianity can pick and choose what it wishes to believe and ignore.

This point has been raised a few times and to be fair is an extremely understandable comment – just wanted to try and very briefly clear this up a touch. The Old Testament laws as laid down in Leviticus etc were laws set out for the nation of Israel at that time, i.e. they are basically the Jewish laws. In the New Testament, when Jesus came, he basically put in place a New covenant with the world that replaced the majority of those laws. Essentially, the Old Testament was written for and about Israel, the New Testament for everyone, whether Jewish or not. Christianity is NOT about obeying laws. The whole doctrine of Grace says that there is NOTHING we can do to make God love us more and NOTHING we can do to make Him love us less.

Sorry for the mild hi-jack, hope that makes sense. Not meant to impart anything either way, just wanted to clear it up. Some great debate points in this thread – let’s keep it like that.

TG610 here and as mentioned by others, whilst not taking the BEST photos, they are still pretty good when you have decent light and the fact you can take pictures anywhere means they will be a damn slight better than no photo at all! I dropped mine down about 20m of the north face of Tryfan and it came out unscathed (annoying scramble down to get it though…). I kind of wish id got a Panasonic as the IQ looks better, but still pleased with they Oly.

Does the throttle stop feeding the fuel required to idle the engine, just because you’re in gear and coasting?

Your mechanical losses are greater in gear as you’re turning the engine more quickly. Do you burn less fuel? Which is the greater effect?

When on overrun (in gear, but no pedal), a modern engine will inject zero fuel and use the flywheel effect of the engine to keep it turning. Only once the engine approaches idle speed will the idle governor kick in and start putting fuel in. You would use much less fuel by ‘coasting’ in gear, accelerating gently when starting to slow down a bit and then coasting in gear again than you would be cutting the engine and starting it if you need power steering! Not to mention that losing power steering, brake servo etc is not the most sensible idea….

Lovefilm seems to have a much better selection of films for streaming than Netflix. As someone mentioned above, the Netflix selection amounts a lot to straight to DVD films or low budget bargain bin jobs. There is some good stuff and they have lots of great TV shows – but the film side is a let down.

Add the Fujifilm X10 to that as well. Another large sensor compact (although not as big as the G1X) which will take great photos.

If you aren’t fussed about swapping lenses then I would look at the new Canon G1X for what seems like it will be very good bang for buck.

Sensor size is, for all intents and purposes, the same size as a APS-C DSLR which will do wonders for image quality compared to a compact. Handling will also be very good. Not a huge zoom range, but enough for most ‘normal’ photography.

Yeah, I can’t quite believe it myself. Taken with an iPhone 4. Actually considering getting a print of it!

Slightly annoyingly only had my phone with me – but still impressed with the result!

(EDIT: Let’s try again…..)

There have been HUGE changes to diesel engine designs in the past 10 years to make them cleaner. DPFs cut down emitted soot to almost zero, NOx emissions down dramatically fro
EGR etc, and new injection strategies to make them run more smoothly. A decent diesel engine can now be virtually indistinguishable from a petrol engine

Another reccomendation for Montgenevre. Was fantastic when I was learning to Snowboard and great once I knew how to do it as well. Very good mix of different graded runs and the town itself is really nice. Quiet too outside of the french/italian holidays.

Would reccomend Go-Montgenevre as the holiday company (as was reccomended earlier). Superb service and great prices. You get a discount on the lift pass as well!

I’ve got a Mammut one with a layer of Windstopper in the front which is great. Only the front bit has Windstopper so the rest is still very breathable. Looks good too.

Mammut WS Beanie

Smartwool PHD are amazing – by far the most comfortable I have used. I have some ThirtyTwo ones as well which are also very good. Don’t think there is much difference between Ski and Snowboard – maybe a bit more padding on the shin for ski socks? (no bad thing)

This isn’t really any more than a suggestion, but I’d say stick in an application to Ricardo. We’ve got a site in Leamington ad are pretty busy at the moment so I’m sure will be taking on placement students. Mainly transmission development up there but some engine as well. Great company to have on your CV!

I just had a Snowboard delivered by City Link. With the slight issue tht they forgot to deliver the snowboard. Went to my mates business where I had it delivered and there was the small box with 2 pairs of sock but missing the rather crucial board bit. The driver managed to kiss a 1.5m long box with my name on apparently. Oh well.

Just taken delivery of my new board (Bataleon Goliath) and the snow is looking immense in Montgenevre/Serre Chevalier – 21st Jan cannot come soon enough!

35mm is equivalent(ish) to a 50mm ‘standard’ lens on a d3100 and so will give a perspective almost the same as the human eye. I’m a big fan of this focal length as it produces great natural looking photos.

50mm will be equivalent to 75mm full frame so will be a very mild telephoto – better for portraits but (in my opinion) not as flexible as the 35mm would be.

Essentially, if you pop it in neutral down a hill then the engine needs to put in fuel to keep the engine turning over. If you leave it in gear and just let off the throttle then e engine almost reverses drive so that the wheels are driving the crankshaft round rather than the other way. This means you can put in zero to minimal fuel to keep the engine turning over.

talking of drafting in the slipstream of lorries, does this annoy, i do it sometimes if im really skint and need to make it home on whats left in the tank. but i wonder if the driver of the lorry is getting angry with me.
this might be a stupid q but does it decrease the mpg of the vehicle im slipstreaming?

If you are in a passenger car then no it wouldn’t have any effect on the lorry.

Load of cobblers – you dont use any more fuel than tick-over if you are not on the throttle, even under engine braking.

+1

In almost all cases you’ll use more fuel than you would if you were engine braking as the engine will be running at idle conditions rather than ‘zero fuelling’ overrun. Plus it isn’t the cleverest idea anyway in case for some reason you need to accelerate quickly.

Highest gear isn’t always most economical…its the highest gear to easily maintain your speed that you need…ie at speeds flowing between 40-50 mph (I live in devon, its easily possible)….4th in my golf iv tdi…sees the economy up, whereas using 5th it stays fairly static…use the torque not just low revs high gear.

Sorry, yeah, if I was able to write logical sentences then this is what I was aiming for. A highER gear is usually better than high revs but not THE highest gear.

A modern diesel will generally be calibrated to be most fuel efficient in the range of around 800-2500rev/min and up to around 50-75% torque. That ‘box’ is basically where the car runs in the NEDC cycle and so that is where it will be calibrated for (as this is where the official figures come from). Although the NEDC cycle is crap when it comes to simulating real world driving – it does still run in the same areas as most ‘normal’ driving do staying in the speed/load box above is a good start.

As others have mentioned, make sure the turbo is boosting as otherwise you’ll just have excess fuelling to get the torque up but not really doing a lot. I wouldnt’t totally agree on accelerating TOO briskly – its generally better to short shift and keep the revs down. Might also be worth even using the gear higher than you would usually – the torque is high enough and low down enough on most modern diesels to allow this. Other than that, as mentioned already, it’s really all about smooth driving and planning ahead.

Ford Puma?

Ooh, that’s a great shout. Quick, handles fantastically, looks good and is something a bit different to a hot hatch (although clearly it is one but in a coupe shell). If you can find one of the limited Racing Pumas then even better (bit more grunt, taughter suspension etc). Think they are around £2-3000 for a good one now and insurance wouldn’t be crazy either.

Yeah, if you really want something with a bit of go that you aren’t going to crash instantly then a hot hatch (as above) would be your best bet. Quick enough to feel fun but not stupidly rapid and most (all?) will be FWD which means you have safer understeer rather than bit more tricky to control oversteer if you overcook a corner. The Golf I would say would be the least hardcore one and so wouldnt bite back as hard as say a Clio Cup.

Even something like a Fiesta Zetec would be good fun – not really quick but handles brilliantly and would be a good drive for a first timer.

i’m quite curious to know whether you theists research other religions, you obviously believe in god so do you have a look about to see what the best way of worshipping him is. my experience of christians has always been a blinkered view, they worship in a certain way, their parents worship ina certain way, nothing more necesary. and yes i know there will be examples that this doesn’t apply to, but i think the standard applies.

I think this is very important actually. The whole aspect of having a belief is that you have weighed up the evidence and information around you and have chosen to believe in what, to you, seems the most likely choice. I won’t claim to have an in depth knowledge of other religions but I have certainly learnt the core beliefs of the major religions to see how they weigh up to Christianity. Taking the example of children following how there parents worship, I think this is where it is most important. For example, I grew up in a Christian family and considered myself to be a Christian. Then I went to Uni and became detached from the church/Christianity. Near the end of my time at Uni when I gave my life back to Christ it was then coming from a place where I had seen a different way of living and realised that, for me, having a life embedded in Christ was the way forward.

This is why healthy discussion (which for the last few pages this has been very good I think) between religions (and including Atheism in this) and real knowledge of what each other believe is very important – just going on blind faith is a little stupid in my estimation.

That argument is bull.

Millions of athiests/humanists try and live decent lives without the need for god.

Millions of christians try and live decent lives partly because they are good people and partly because their book tells them to fear god.

Who is being moral here?

Nope, absolutely correct and I apologise if my wording made it sound like I was saying only Christians etc were moral. I know plenty of non-Christians who are absolutely amazing in what they give to society, how they treat others etc and who eclipse me and a lot of Christians I know by quite a long way. As mentioned in a previous post, Christianity is not in itself about doing ‘good things’ or trying to be better than anyone else. It is actually almost the complete opposite where the basis of the Christian faith is that there is NOTHING we can do to make ourselves better in Gods eyes.

What I meant by my post just above was that humans in general have morals whereas animals do not. And GrahamS, your points totally make sense and your correct I am putting human displays of morals into animals – they could well have but personally I have yet to see any evidence. Thanks for that link though, will have a read of it.

You watch different nature documentaries to me then!

OK, poorly worded by me again. What I meant was that, take for example the cases where Dolphins have been found to chase and kill Porpoises for basically no other reason than the fun of it, you won’t find one of the Dolphin pack (school? shoal?…whatever the collective noun for dolphins is!) trying to stop the other Dolphins from attacking the Porpoise because they think it is wrong.

Or you won’t have a couple of Lions staging a protest at the inhumane treatment of Gazelles. Or a group of penguins holding a trial for one of their group who stole some nest material from another penguin (notice on Frozen Planet when that happened there were other penguins there watching but none intervened).

Ok, they may be some extreme examples, but hopefully that makes my point a wee bit clearer….possibly…

The idea that god (yes, lower case “g”) is watching over you and loves you is so incredibly far-fetched as to be laughable.

Just interested, other than not having a belief in God, why is that more laughable and far-fetched than any other Christian belief?

That you even think you matter at all in a world with seven billion people in a universe 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles wide is arrogant in the extreme.

Again, the whole Christian faith is based around the fact that to be perfectly honest I don’t matter any more to God than the 30 other people in my office, or the millions of people in the UK or the billions of people in the world. God doesn’t need us, but shows His love to each person anyway.

That you wouldn’t be a moral person without the threat of god punishing you, or the idea that god instilled your moral compass is reprehensible.

This is one of the more difficult points and I’ll say now that I probably won’t give a very good explanation of my thoughts – but will try anyway…

The beliefs of those who are not part of a religion (again, will focus on Christianity here) is that humans evolved in the same way as any other creature on earth. Looking into the animal kingdom, you see lots of ‘human traits’ although in different ways – for example animals build shelters, they use tools, they communicate, they show emotion etc. OK, humans have taken these to a more advanced level, but they are still there.

One thing that you do not find in the animal kingdom is any form of knowledge or reaction to ‘good and evil’. Animals do not have morals. To quote Eddie Izzard, there is no such thing as an Evil Giraffe. In the animal world it is kill or be killed. There is murder (see dolphins attacking porpoises for no reason at all), there is genocide, there is theft etc but no other animal will really care about that.

So apparently humans have evolved in exactly the same way as other animals, albeit to maybe a more advanced level, but in the billions of years of evolution not ONE single other species has evolved to develop morals? To be honest as a scientific type I find that far harder to believe than I do to believe in God.

if god loves me unconditionally why will god punish me for not doing as god says …

In the same way a father loves their son/daughter but will punish them if they do something wrong. They don’t stop loving them but the act still needs to be dealt with. I have to say this is where it starts to get very difficult to explain (and I’ll confess I’m not very good at it anyway!) on an Internet forum without coming across very judgemental or fire and brimstoney etc so you’ll have to believe I’m trying to say it without it coming across like that!

but really your church has a long way to go

Couldn’t agree more – probably even further than you imagine! It is sickening to see what some so called Christians say and do as it is so far from what Christianity is all about. And sadly, these are the aspects portrayed in the media which the casts a dampener over everyone else.

Well, I’d say that’s more Speed12’s opinion, rather than ‘God’s’ as to what is the ‘best plan’ for your life, and have to say I disagree completely with that. If, as according to Christian doctrine, that we are all ‘God’s Children’, then surely he loves us all equally and therefore it don’t matter if you’re Gay, Straight, Bi, whatever. No?

Correct, my wording wasn’t the best and I apologise for any offence caused. Elfins comment here echoes what I said at the end of my last post as to what the basis of the Christian faith is – Gods unconditional love. Not being ‘good’. Not doing ‘good things’. Not trying to ‘convert’ people. Nothing else but that.