>> Great - now multiply the time it took to do it by 300,000,000 people >> in the US. And don't forget the microwave, the oven, the VCR, . . .
> But you don;t need to change the microwave, or cooker time do you ? > Cokoing time doesn't change depending oin time of year. > VCR yes if you still have such an antique device my DVD recorder > changes itself ;-)
Yes, you do have to set the microwave--it has a clock, if you don't reset it then you're going to look at it one day forgetting that you didn't reset it and end up missing an important appointment.
The real pisser is the idiots changing the date, so that some things now need to be reset _four_ times, twice when official change occurs, and twice more to unset the change that was programmed into them at the factory using the old dates. And no, they don't all have USB ports.
>>> It's far less complicated than figuring out if the Customer Service >>> phones will be answered by companies in other time zones when I'm >>> making calls early in the morning or late afternoon.
>> Particularly when you don't know if they're in Arizona, California >> or New Mexico (for example) all of whom have different ideas of the >> time. As I understand the Chinese get around the whole damned >> problem by having one time zone for the entire country.
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:41:35 -0500, J. Clarke wrote: > whisky-dave wrote: >> "ray" <r...@zianet.com> wrote in message >> news:7l90qoF3c5mjlU6@mid.individual.net... >>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:51:04 -0500, tony cooper wrote:
>>> Great - now multiply the time it took to do it by 300,000,000 people >>> in the US. And don't forget the microwave, the oven, the VCR, . . .
>> But you don;t need to change the microwave, or cooker time do you ? >> Cokoing time doesn't change depending oin time of year. VCR yes if you >> still have such an antique device my DVD recorder changes itself ;-)
> Yes, you do have to set the microwave--it has a clock, if you don't > reset it then you're going to look at it one day forgetting that you > didn't reset it and end up missing an important appointment.
> The real pisser is the idiots changing the date, so that some things now > need to be reset _four_ times, twice when official change occurs, and > twice more to unset the change that was programmed into them at the > factory using the old dates. And no, they don't all have USB ports.
A real corker for me is the older digital clocks that can only be set back an hour by advancing it 23 hours.
>>>> It's far less complicated than figuring out if the Customer Service >>>> phones will be answered by companies in other time zones when I'm >>>> making calls early in the morning or late afternoon.
>>> Particularly when you don't know if they're in Arizona, California or >>> New Mexico (for example) all of whom have different ideas of the time. >>> As I understand the Chinese get around the whole damned problem by >>> having one time zone for the entire country.
ray wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:41:35 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:
>> whisky-dave wrote: >>> "ray" <r...@zianet.com> wrote in message >>> news:7l90qoF3c5mjlU6@mid.individual.net... >>>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:51:04 -0500, tony cooper wrote:
>>>> Great - now multiply the time it took to do it by 300,000,000 >>>> people in the US. And don't forget the microwave, the oven, the >>>> VCR, . . .
>>> But you don;t need to change the microwave, or cooker time do you ? >>> Cokoing time doesn't change depending oin time of year. VCR yes if >>> you still have such an antique device my DVD recorder changes >>> itself ;-)
>> Yes, you do have to set the microwave--it has a clock, if you don't >> reset it then you're going to look at it one day forgetting that you >> didn't reset it and end up missing an important appointment.
>> The real pisser is the idiots changing the date, so that some things >> now need to be reset _four_ times, twice when official change >> occurs, and twice more to unset the change that was programmed into >> them at the factory using the old dates. And no, they don't all >> have USB ports.
> A real corker for me is the older digital clocks that can only be set > back an hour by advancing it 23 hours.
Yep.
The next time they mess with the daylight savings time they need to put in a provision that no legislator may instruct a family member or staffer to reset his clocks, he must do it for himself. Maybe if they have to set their own clocks they'll figure out what a pain in the butt it is.
What we really need is a constitutional amendment stating that any legislation that a reasonable man considers to be a pain in the ass is null and void.
whisky-dave wrote: > "ray" <r...@zianet.com> wrote in message
>> Particularly when you don't know if they're in Arizona, >> California >> or New Mexico (for example) all of whom have different ideas >> of the >> time. As I understand the Chinese get around the whole damned >> problem by having one time zone for the entire country.
> And India splits it in to 30 min times zones.
Actually, India uses a uniform standard time throughout the country, 5 1/2 hours ahead of UT. It's much smaller than the USA but it's still a pretty large country. Between where I live on the eastern side and Mumbai in the west, there's a 20° difference and almost 1 1/2 hrs in local solar times. It's about 30° and 2 hrs between the two extreme ends of the country.
> The next time they mess with the daylight savings time they > need to > put in a provision that no legislator may instruct a family > member or > staffer to reset his clocks, he must do it for himself. Maybe > if > they have to set their own clocks they'll figure out what a > pain in > the butt it is.
> What we really need is a constitutional amendment stating that > any > legislation that a reasonable man considers to be a pain in the > ass > is null and void.
I would have thought that the physical task of setting clocks is a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that someone unused to DST would experience a more extended period of adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock says that it's still the same 9 AM.
I also wonder about the amount of adjustments necessary to certain things that have to be scheduled according to the actual passage of time. Like medication that has to be taken at strictly spaced intervals. And is the daily evening flight changed from 7 pm on October 31st to 6 pm the next day? The collective workload and the psychological adjustments needed must be enormous.
>> If it takes a person five minutes to change the necessary clocks, and >> if that person would have spent those five minutes watching Jerry >> Springer or Oprah if there wasn't a need to change the clocks, then >> there is no waste. If the person multi-tasks, as most of us do, while >> changing the clocks, there is no wasted time.
>But almost no one can multi-task that just think theyv can, >what a person does is time-slice adn proiratorise even teh eye does that >as only about 15% of our total vision is active at any one point the brain >captutes the view then the eye scans another area and captures that and the >brain joins >it and pretends it's one picture, which is how and why magitians can perform >their tricks. >They use this time-slicing to make sure we don;t 'see' what they are doing.
When I say "multi-task", I don't mean re-setting the clocks and doing neurosurgery at the same time. I can watch a football game on TV as I reset the clocks and I'm multi-tasking.
>> Who here didn't have time to do something important Sunday because >> they had to divert that time to changing the clocks?
>> Don't all raise your hands at once.
>Nah most of mine change themselves, the others I do when I have 'free time'
I have no clocks that re-set themselves. I have clock displays in electronic devices - computer, telephone, cable box, etc - that self-adjust, but my alarm clocks and wall clocks don't.
>VCR yes if you still have such an antique device my DVD recorder changes >itself ;-)
>>> It's far less complicated than figuring out if the Customer Service >>> phones will be answered by companies in other time zones when I'm making >>> calls early in the morning or late afternoon.
>> Particularly when you don't know if they're in Arizona, California or New >> Mexico (for example) all of whom have different ideas of the time. As I >> understand the Chinese get around the whole damned problem by having one >> time zone for the entire country.
> Well, you don't NEED to change any of the damned things. I routinely > leave my watch set as it is and mentally subtract an hour (or is it add > one?) during the summer. But equally obviously, if they'd leave the > system alone no one would need to change a damned thing!
... and try to have a good apology for when you're an hour late, and miss the flight, or meeting your lady! <G> A risky policy....in other words. An hour early and you could take some photos!
In article <4aef0d78$0$23472$426a7...@news.free.fr>, o.f.n.u....@la.poste.net wrote: >mianileng wrote: >> John Turco wrote: >>> Hello, my fellow Americans...did you remember to move all of >>> your >>> timepieces, back an hour? Daylight Saving Time ended, early on >>> Sunday >>> morning (November 1, 2009), in our country.
>>> I, personally, needed to reset my wristwatch, several clocks, >>> various >>> electronic devices, a number of digicams and my lone DSLR >>> (Pentax >>> K100D); initially, I forgot a few of the devices (including >>> some >>> cameras), and did them later.
>> As someone living in a country where DST is not used, I have >> never been able to understand the logic behind the practice or >> how it's considered to be worth all the disruption and >> adjustments it makes necessary. By adjustments, I mean not just >> the twice-a-year resetting of clocks, but also adjusting life >> (personal, business, time-critical management, etc.) to the new >> timings. But I'm not blindly criticising something I don't >> understand. I'm open to enlightenment.
>The idea is that in summer (because Winter time is closer to true time) >more evening activities can take place in daylight. In other words, this >takes daylight hours in the very early morning (when most people are >still asleep) and puts them in the evening.
>Of course, if the offices of government and big companies, schools, >daycare centers, shops, all started the day at 7am and finished it at >4pm, this would have about the same effect.
They started changing the time for switchover recently to save ENERGY. That has put more students in the dark. I liked the change overall.
In article <hcs5i6$92...@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfr...@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote: >In article <4aef0d78$0$23472$426a7...@news.free.fr>, o.f.n.u....@la.poste.net > wrote: >>mianileng wrote: >>> John Turco wrote: >>>> Hello, my fellow Americans...did you remember to move all of >>>> your >>>> timepieces, back an hour? Daylight Saving Time ended, early on >>>> Sunday >>>> morning (November 1, 2009), in our country.
>>>> I, personally, needed to reset my wristwatch, several clocks, >>>> various >>>> electronic devices, a number of digicams and my lone DSLR >>>> (Pentax >>>> K100D); initially, I forgot a few of the devices (including >>>> some >>>> cameras), and did them later.
>>> As someone living in a country where DST is not used, I have >>> never been able to understand the logic behind the practice or >>> how it's considered to be worth all the disruption and >>> adjustments it makes necessary. By adjustments, I mean not just >>> the twice-a-year resetting of clocks, but also adjusting life >>> (personal, business, time-critical management, etc.) to the new >>> timings. But I'm not blindly criticising something I don't >>> understand. I'm open to enlightenment.
>>The idea is that in summer (because Winter time is closer to true time) >>more evening activities can take place in daylight. In other words, this >>takes daylight hours in the very early morning (when most people are >>still asleep) and puts them in the evening.
>>Of course, if the offices of government and big companies, schools, >>daycare centers, shops, all started the day at 7am and finished it at >>4pm, this would have about the same effect.
>They started changing the time for switchover recently to save ENERGY. >That has put more students in the dark. I liked the change overall.
I might add, light until 9:30 PM in the summer is wonderfull. Its even brighter on the west coast USA. Dark at 6:00 sucks.
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:15:08 +0000, GregS wrote: > In article <hcs5i6$92...@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, > zekfr...@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote: >>In article <4aef0d78$0$23472$426a7...@news.free.fr>, >>o.f.n.u....@la.poste.net >> wrote: >>>mianileng wrote: >>>> John Turco wrote: >>>>> Hello, my fellow Americans...did you remember to move all of your >>>>> timepieces, back an hour? Daylight Saving Time ended, early on >>>>> Sunday >>>>> morning (November 1, 2009), in our country.
>>>>> I, personally, needed to reset my wristwatch, several clocks, >>>>> various >>>>> electronic devices, a number of digicams and my lone DSLR (Pentax >>>>> K100D); initially, I forgot a few of the devices (including some >>>>> cameras), and did them later.
>>>> As someone living in a country where DST is not used, I have never >>>> been able to understand the logic behind the practice or how it's >>>> considered to be worth all the disruption and adjustments it makes >>>> necessary. By adjustments, I mean not just the twice-a-year resetting >>>> of clocks, but also adjusting life (personal, business, time-critical >>>> management, etc.) to the new timings. But I'm not blindly criticising >>>> something I don't understand. I'm open to enlightenment.
>>>The idea is that in summer (because Winter time is closer to true time) >>>more evening activities can take place in daylight. In other words, >>>this takes daylight hours in the very early morning (when most people >>>are still asleep) and puts them in the evening.
>>>Of course, if the offices of government and big companies, schools, >>>daycare centers, shops, all started the day at 7am and finished it at >>>4pm, this would have about the same effect.
>>They started changing the time for switchover recently to save ENERGY. >>That has put more students in the dark. I liked the change overall.
> I might add, light until 9:30 PM in the summer is wonderfull. Its even > brighter on the west coast USA. Dark at 6:00 sucks.
> greg
So in the winter we change back so it gets dark earlier - makes sense
> Hello, my fellow Americans...did you remember to move all of your > timepieces, back > an hour? Daylight Saving Time ended, early on Sunday morning (November 1, > 2009), in > our country.
> I, personally, needed to reset my wristwatch, several clocks, various > electronic > devices, a number of digicams and my lone DSLR (Pentax K100D); initially, > I forgot > a few of the devices (including some cameras), and did them later.
> -- > Cordially, > John Turco <j...@concentric.net>
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:19:52 +0530, "mianileng" <mianil...@invalid.com> wrote:
>I would have thought that the physical task of setting clocks is >a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >someone unused to DST would experience a more extended period of >adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock says >that it's still the same 9 AM.
That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is set to standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is that I spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep deficit since I have to get up an hour earlier than I would otherwise, and I never seem to adjust to it.
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:19:52 +0530, "mianileng" <mianil...@invalid.com> > wrote:
>>I would have thought that the physical task of setting clocks is >>a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >>someone unused to DST would experience a more extended period of >>adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >>suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock says >>that it's still the same 9 AM.
> That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is set to > standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is that I > spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep deficit since > I have to get up an hour earlier than I would otherwise, and I never > seem to adjust to it.
>>>I would have thought that the physical task of setting clocks is >>>a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >>>someone unused to DST would experience a more extended period of >>>adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >>>suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock says >>>that it's still the same 9 AM.
>> That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is set to >> standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is that I >> spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep deficit since >> I have to get up an hour earlier than I would otherwise, and I never >> seem to adjust to it.
>>>> I would have thought that the physical task of setting clocks is >>>> a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >>>> someone unused to DST would experience a more extended period of >>>> adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >>>> suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock says >>>> that it's still the same 9 AM.
>>> That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is set to >>> standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is that I >>> spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep deficit since >>> I have to get up an hour earlier than I would otherwise, and I never >>> seem to adjust to it. >> Amen!
> Glad to know there are some fellow sufferers!
You can add me to your list. I fucking hate DST!
-- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> I would have thought that the physical task of setting >>>>> clocks is >>>>> a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >>>>> someone unused to DST would experience a more extended >>>>> period of >>>>> adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >>>>> suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock >>>>> says >>>>> that it's still the same 9 AM.
>>>> That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is >>>> set to >>>> standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is >>>> that I >>>> spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep >>>> deficit >>>> since I have to get up an hour earlier than I would >>>> otherwise, and >>>> I never seem to adjust to it.
>>> Amen!
>> Glad to know there are some fellow sufferers!
> You can add me to your list. I fucking hate DST!
Now that's an unequivocal statement :-) This thread has been an eye opener. The number of posters represents a tiny percentage of those who have to live with DST, but still, I'm quite surprised at the overwhelming majority of anti-DST posts. It's gratifying in a way because it indicates that I have not simply been too obtuse to see how the benefits of DST outweigh its disadvantages.
>>>>>> I would have thought that the physical task of setting >>>>>> clocks is >>>>>> a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >>>>>> someone unused to DST would experience a more extended >>>>>> period of >>>>>> adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >>>>>> suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock >>>>>> says >>>>>> that it's still the same 9 AM.
>>>>> That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is >>>>> set to >>>>> standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is >>>>> that I >>>>> spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep >>>>> deficit >>>>> since I have to get up an hour earlier than I would >>>>> otherwise, and >>>>> I never seem to adjust to it.
>>>> Amen!
>>> Glad to know there are some fellow sufferers!
>> You can add me to your list. I fucking hate DST!
>Now that's an unequivocal statement :-) This thread has been an >eye opener. The number of posters represents a tiny percentage of >those who have to live with DST, but still, I'm quite surprised >at the overwhelming majority of anti-DST posts. It's gratifying >in a way because it indicates that I have not simply been too >obtuse to see how the benefits of DST outweigh its disadvantages.
Just to present a view on the other side, I'm in favor of DST. The clock-changing aspect is a inconsequential inconvenience compared to the benefit of an additional hour of daylight recreation. Golf after work, for example.
>>>>>>> I would have thought that the physical task of setting >>>>>>> clocks is >>>>>>> a passing and relatively minor inconvenience. I expect that >>>>>>> someone unused to DST would experience a more extended >>>>>>> period of >>>>>>> adjusting one's biological clock, rather like jet lag. You >>>>>>> suddenly have to get to work an hour early while the clock >>>>>>> says >>>>>>> that it's still the same 9 AM.
>>>>>> That is my main problem with DST. My biological clock is >>>>>> set to >>>>>> standard time, and I'm an insomniac. All DST means to me is >>>>>> that I >>>>>> spend a good chunk of the year on (an even larger) sleep >>>>>> deficit >>>>>> since I have to get up an hour earlier than I would >>>>>> otherwise, and >>>>>> I never seem to adjust to it.
>>>>> Amen!
>>>> Glad to know there are some fellow sufferers!
>>> You can add me to your list. I fucking hate DST!
>>Now that's an unequivocal statement :-) This thread has been an >>eye opener. The number of posters represents a tiny percentage of >>those who have to live with DST, but still, I'm quite surprised >>at the overwhelming majority of anti-DST posts. It's gratifying >>in a way because it indicates that I have not simply been too >>obtuse to see how the benefits of DST outweigh its disadvantages.
>Just to present a view on the other side, I'm in favor of DST. The >clock-changing aspect is a inconsequential inconvenience compared to >the benefit of an additional hour of daylight recreation. Golf after >work, for example.
Well, as I indicated in my earlier post, the clock changing aspect has nothing to do with it from my perspective. For me it's a matter of feeling like hell for most of the DST period.
tony cooper wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 23:41:56 +0530, "mianileng" > <mianil...@invalid.com> > wrote:
>> Bob Larter wrote:
>>> You can add me to your list. I fucking hate DST!
>> Now that's an unequivocal statement :-) This thread has been >> an >> eye opener. The number of posters represents a tiny percentage >> of >> those who have to live with DST, but still, I'm quite >> surprised >> at the overwhelming majority of anti-DST posts. It's >> gratifying >> in a way because it indicates that I have not simply been too >> obtuse to see how the benefits of DST outweigh its >> disadvantages.
> Just to present a view on the other side, I'm in favor of DST. > The > clock-changing aspect is a inconsequential inconvenience > compared to > the benefit of an additional hour of daylight recreation. Golf > after > work, for example.
I expected that there would be those in favor of DST, otherwise it would have been abolished long ago. I respect your right to have a viewpoint that differs from mine, and I indicated in an earlier post that I consider the clock-setting aspect to be a relatively minor part of the overall consequences of DST.
However, the rescheduling of working and leisure hours in actual time (not clock time) can be done, and *is* done in many countries, simply by notification. I guess it's something like an acquired taste for certain foods. You get to like it after you've become accustomed to it, while others never get used to it.
I do feel, however, that if an otherwise intelligent and civilized person who's never had to keep time were to be suddenly forced to choose between the two systems, he'd go for no DST.
In article <7l8jauF3c5mj...@mid.individual.net>, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote: >On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 21:57:08 +0530, mianileng wrote:
>> John Turco wrote: >>> Hello, my fellow Americans...did you remember to move all of your >>> timepieces, back an hour? Daylight Saving Time ended, early on Sunday >>> morning (November 1, 2009), in our country.
>>> I, personally, needed to reset my wristwatch, several clocks, various >>> electronic devices, a number of digicams and my lone DSLR (Pentax >>> K100D); initially, I forgot a few of the devices (including some >>> cameras), and did them later.
>> As someone living in a country where DST is not used, I have never been >> able to understand the logic behind the practice or how it's considered >> to be worth all the disruption and adjustments it makes necessary. By >> adjustments, I mean not just the twice-a-year resetting of clocks, but >> also adjusting life (personal, business, time-critical management, etc.) >> to the new timings. But I'm not blindly criticising something I don't >> understand. I'm open to enlightenment.
>No logic to it at all. It's claimed it saves energy, but a study in >Indiana (a 'split' state) showed that to be totally bogus. It's >psychological - that's all. And a huge waste of resources, resetting all >the damned clocks twice a year. It should certainly be abolished - would >make life simpler all the way around.
Maybe it doesnt matter to the piss ass small northeastern US states, but it matters alot to those who live in the large mountain western states like Utah, Nevada, Colorado etc...
>> Great - now multiply the time it took to do it by 300,000,000 people in >> the US. And don't forget the microwave, the oven, the VCR, . . .
>But you don;t need to change the microwave, or cooker time do you ? >Cokoing time doesn't change depending oin time of year. >VCR yes if you still have such an antique device my DVD recorder changes >itself ;-)
You want the clock on the microwave oven to be correct if you use any type of automatic timed cooking.
>>> It's far less complicated than figuring out if the Customer Service >>> phones will be answered by companies in other time zones when I'm making >>> calls early in the morning or late afternoon.
>> Particularly when you don't know if they're in Arizona, California or New >> Mexico (for example) all of whom have different ideas of the time. As I >> understand the Chinese get around the whole damned problem by having one >> time zone for the entire country.
>tony cooper wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 23:41:56 +0530, "mianileng" >> <mianil...@invalid.com> >> wrote:
>>> Bob Larter wrote:
>>>> You can add me to your list. I fucking hate DST!
>>> Now that's an unequivocal statement :-) This thread has been >>> an >>> eye opener. The number of posters represents a tiny percentage >>> of >>> those who have to live with DST, but still, I'm quite >>> surprised >>> at the overwhelming majority of anti-DST posts. It's >>> gratifying >>> in a way because it indicates that I have not simply been too >>> obtuse to see how the benefits of DST outweigh its >>> disadvantages.
>> Just to present a view on the other side, I'm in favor of DST. >> The >> clock-changing aspect is a inconsequential inconvenience >> compared to >> the benefit of an additional hour of daylight recreation. Golf >> after >> work, for example.
>I expected that there would be those in favor of DST, otherwise >it would have been abolished long ago. I respect your right to >have a viewpoint that differs from mine, and I indicated in an >earlier post that I consider the clock-setting aspect to be a >relatively minor part of the overall consequences of DST.
>However, the rescheduling of working and leisure hours in actual >time (not clock time) can be done, and *is* done in many >countries,
As a former owner of a business, there's no way that I would want to change the business's hours during the year. In the different countries I've visited, *all* of the business's have traditional hours and early closing days, but they are based on years of tradition.
>simply by notification. I guess it's something like an >acquired taste for certain foods. You get to like it after you've >become accustomed to it, while others never get used to it.
>I do feel, however, that if an otherwise intelligent and >civilized person who's never had to keep time were to be suddenly >forced to choose between the two systems, he'd go for no DST.
What do you think happened in the US? At some point in the past, the decision to opt for DST or not to was made. More places did than didn't. It was local option. The original concept was Benjamin Franklin's, by the way.
Some here have mentioned trouble because their sleep patterns are disturbed. How do these people travel to different time zones and survive?
They would not want to be elected as a congressman from some state on a different time zone than Washington because of the need to travel back and forth from DC to their home state.
On the trips I've made to other time zones, my sleep pattern has never suffered. However, my stomach stays on my own time for several days. Not so much a problem staying in the US, but trips to Europe and Africa have resulted in being hungry at odd hours.
On 2 Nov 2009 17:31:10 GMT, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
>No logic to it at all. It's claimed it saves energy, but a study in >Indiana (a 'split' state) showed that to be totally bogus.
Not so. The study was done by a team from the University of California, Santa Barbara. It showed an increase in the use of electricity. Many people claimed that this demonstrates that the energy saving claims were bogus based on this.
However, the study didn't take into account the increased use of home air conditioners. They compared the southwest corner of Indiana (no dst) with the rest of the state. The area was, except for Evansville, a rural area. It was taken at a time when new homes were being built with central air and older houses were adding window units. Air conditioners, in that era, were not "energy efficient".
It was the study that was bogus. Any "scientific" study that doesn't take something this obvious into account is without merit.
I grew up in Indiana, and never lived in an air conditioned house. The first time I lived in an air conditioned house in Indiana is when I moved back there in 1966. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
tony cooper wrote: > On 2 Nov 2009 17:31:10 GMT, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
>> No logic to it at all. It's claimed it saves energy, but a study in >> Indiana (a 'split' state) showed that to be totally bogus.
> Not so. The study was done by a team from the University of > California, Santa Barbara. It showed an increase in the use of > electricity. Many people claimed that this demonstrates that the > energy saving claims were bogus based on this.
> However, the study didn't take into account the increased use of home > air conditioners. They compared the southwest corner of Indiana (no > dst) with the rest of the state. The area was, except for Evansville, > a rural area. It was taken at a time when new homes were being built > with central air and older houses were adding window units. Air > conditioners, in that era, were not "energy efficient".
> It was the study that was bogus. Any "scientific" study that doesn't > take something this obvious into account is without merit.
> I grew up in Indiana, and never lived in an air conditioned house. > The first time I lived in an air conditioned house in Indiana is when > I moved back there in 1966.
I'd like to see the supporting evidence for the claim that the difference in energy consumption for two adjacent areas was due to increased use of air conditioners in _one_ of them.
|
