Recommended Posts
winsor 187
QuoteQuoteAnd just for full disclosure, I work as an environmental engineer (water field, not atmosphere)
When I was in school, Civil Engineering was treated as the technical equivalent of Special Ed.. Professor Todd, when berating a group of Juniors who had turned in a less than stellar performance in one of his Organic Chemistry exams, told the class that they really weren't cut out for the hard sciences, and should perhaps consider Civil Engineering.
Of course, Environmental majors were the ones to whom Civil was akin to Rocket Science. I would not brag about it.
Irony score- perfect 10!
Too bad organic chemistry is a big part of any environmental engineering curriculum.
Fortunately, I have the perfect solution for you. Since you obviously can’t stand those weak minded civil and environmental engineers, you should immediately stop using all buildings, roads and utilities. On behalf of the profession, I apologize for not making things good enough for you. Then you should simply move somewhere where there are none (or little) of those. I would recommend Sudan. Once you get there, be sure to tell them that everyone who designed the American infrastructure is a “special ed student”. Be sure to tell me how the water there is, it hasn’t been fooled with by any of those dim-wit environmental engineers. Have a nice trip
The lowest ranking member of a Medical School graduating class is still addressed as "Doctor." There is, however, a hierarchy amongst medical professisons, and Procology is not usually the destination of the best and the brightest.
Organic for Environmentals is akin to Diff. Eq's for Civils. Sure, they're core courses, but they have a different significance in a Chemical or Mechanical Engineering curriculum (disciplines of which there is also a dearth in the Sudan).
There is certainly a need for the semi-technical disciplines given to brute force and ignorance. Moving about large amounts of dirt and cranking out volumes of ill-considered regulations are examples of tasks to which they are well suited.
However, such issues as optimization of traffic flow and the prevention or remediation of pollution are the domain of other disciplines.
Blue skies,
Winsor
>>However, such issues as optimization of traffic flow and the prevention or remediation of pollution are the domain of other disciplines.
Wrong. I'm currently sitting around 40 bright professionals with civil and environmental engineering degrees who do both of those things every day. Sure, earth work calculations take less brain cells than designing a nuclear reactor. But you could dumb down any discipline by taking out the hard parts that slightly overlap other fields and leaving only the menial tasks.
>>Organic for Environmentals is akin to Diff. Eq's for Civils
Terrible comparison that further shows you don't really understand the discipline that you are so anxious to piss on. The environmental department at my office uses organic chemistry EVERY DAY
Civil engineer steal your woman?
brenthutch 388
Why dont you sort out your cranial/rectal inversion, and read the attache article at the start of the thread. Then get back to me
I don't think I ever called you a butt head or whatever you are accusing me over so I would appreciate the same courtesy.
Anyway, I gave it a quick read. It does indeed list a lot of failures of the IPCC. However, if you think that everything they have ever done is a big lie, then that would also be wrong and you are not looking at the whole picture. Since it doesn't attempt to provide a balanced picture of the success and failures of the IPCC, I'm not interested in giving a lot of credit to an attack piece. Kinda like your personal attack on me above- I don't really care enough to respond to spite.
Anyway, I gave it a quick read. It does indeed list a lot of failures of the IPCC. However, if you think that everything they have ever done is a big lie, then that would also be wrong and you are not looking at the whole picture. Since it doesn't attempt to provide a balanced picture of the success and failures of the IPCC, I'm not interested in giving a lot of credit to an attack piece. Kinda like your personal attack on me above- I don't really care enough to respond to spite.
brenthutch 388
To answer your earlier query, I have nothing against the environment and I frequently do volunteer work to clean it up, adapt a highway, tree planting, and support for dam removal to mention a few, What gets my goat is that the whole AGW cap and trade thing is a huge scam that plays on peoples emotions. Cap and trade will HURT the environment not help it. A better question would be why do you hate the environment. As far as the "personal attack" I was just indulging your earlier post inviting one.
brenthutch 388
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/green-affected/6817-global-warming-ethanol-ddt-and-environmentalisms-dark-side
"In 2008, Time magazine wrote about ethanol's dubious environmental benefits in a cover story entitled, "The Clean Energy Scam." The article warned that forests, wetlands, and grasslands were being sacrificed in a rush to farm crops that could be turned into gasoline. More recently, the peer-reviewed journal Science reported on a study finding that cap-and-trade accounting systems understate the emissions created by the production of biofuels. The study concluded that cap-and-trade programs could encourage biofuel production that would displace 59% of the world's natural forest cover by 2050."
So who is the environmentalist now?
"In 2008, Time magazine wrote about ethanol's dubious environmental benefits in a cover story entitled, "The Clean Energy Scam." The article warned that forests, wetlands, and grasslands were being sacrificed in a rush to farm crops that could be turned into gasoline. More recently, the peer-reviewed journal Science reported on a study finding that cap-and-trade accounting systems understate the emissions created by the production of biofuels. The study concluded that cap-and-trade programs could encourage biofuel production that would displace 59% of the world's natural forest cover by 2050."
So who is the environmentalist now?
I never said I was for biofuels/ ethanol. If you really care, search my post history. I'm pretty sure I have said several times that I think policy has been wrong in that area.
brenthutch 388
I never said you did. You asked me what my beef was with parts of the green movement
winsor 187
Quote>>However, such issues as optimization of traffic flow and the prevention or remediation of pollution are the domain of other disciplines.
Wrong. I'm currently sitting around 40 bright professionals with civil and environmental engineering degrees who do both of those things every day. Sure, earth work calculations take less brain cells than designing a nuclear reactor. But you could dumb down any discipline by taking out the hard parts that slightly overlap other fields and leaving only the menial tasks.
Bright by your standards, I will grant you. I should have said that doing these things WELL is the domain of other disciplines.
Some disciplines do not dumb down; Environmental does not require dumbing down in the first place.
Quote
>>Organic for Environmentals is akin to Diff. Eq's for Civils
Terrible comparison that further shows you don't really understand the discipline that you are so anxious to piss on. The environmental department at my office uses organic chemistry EVERY DAY
Big deal - janitors use organic chemistry every day, as well (various wetting agents, surfactants, solvents, etc.).
All things being said, Environmentals are pretty far down the food chain, acedemically.
Quote
Civil engineer steal your woman?
Irony score 10/10
kallend 1,649
Civil vs Chemical: I'd take any kind of engineer's opinion over that of a poly-sci or business major.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
winsor 187
Quote
Civil vs Chemical: I'd take any kind of engineer's opinion over that of a poly-sci or business major.
That's not saying much, but point taken.
brenthutch 388
passive aggressive, no balls
When I was in school, Civil Engineering was treated as the technical equivalent of Special Ed.. Professor Todd, when berating a group of Juniors who had turned in a less than stellar performance in one of his Organic Chemistry exams, told the class that they really weren't cut out for the hard sciences, and should perhaps consider Civil Engineering.
Of course, Environmental majors were the ones to whom Civil was akin to Rocket Science. I would not brag about it.
Irony score- perfect 10!
Too bad organic chemistry is a big part of any environmental engineering curriculum.
Fortunately, I have the perfect solution for you. Since you obviously can’t stand those weak minded civil and environmental engineers, you should immediately stop using all buildings, roads and utilities. On behalf of the profession, I apologize for not making things good enough for you. Then you should simply move somewhere where there are none (or little) of those. I would recommend Sudan. Once you get there, be sure to tell them that everyone who designed the American infrastructure is a “special ed student”. Be sure to tell me how the water there is, it hasn’t been fooled with by any of those dim-wit environmental engineers. Have a nice trip
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites