Difference between revisions of "Talk:2009-08-01 49 -113"
From Geohashing
imported>Macronencer (Enjoyed this crazy tale!) |
imported>Elbie |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Oh boy... I know I shouldn't laugh, but I was chuckling throughout much of this. I hope you weren't too badly bitten! The way you make this sound, I think it almost qualifies for a MNIMB honorable mention!! | Oh boy... I know I shouldn't laugh, but I was chuckling throughout much of this. I hope you weren't too badly bitten! The way you make this sound, I think it almost qualifies for a MNIMB honorable mention!! | ||
Regarding the farming... I've noticed these square fields with circles in them on Google Maps/Earth many times. Is it irrigation that produces the circles? I find it a bit odd that they use a square grid of fields: hexagonal like a honeycomb would be more efficient. --[[User:Macronencer|macronencer]] 14:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC) | Regarding the farming... I've noticed these square fields with circles in them on Google Maps/Earth many times. Is it irrigation that produces the circles? I find it a bit odd that they use a square grid of fields: hexagonal like a honeycomb would be more efficient. --[[User:Macronencer|macronencer]] 14:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | :You are correct. I assume compactness is not a necessity. ;) -- [[User:relet|relet]] 15:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::The circles are indeed from the irrigation -- you can read more about it here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_pivot_irrigation] The land in Alberta was parceled into farms before this became the norm, thus the rectangular lands. And while hexagonal would be more efficient in theory, but it would be a pain in the ass to rezone the entire province, rebuild the roads, do all the paperwork, and avoid all the pitchforks. Albertans are afraid of change. [[User:Elbie|- Elbie]] 16:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Alberta doesn't have mosquitoes. We have 747s that suck blood. --[[User:Meghan|Meghan]] 15:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | : Lol, true. I originally thought about writing it up as "semi-visible flying velociraptors" and then discarded the idea, not having any good shots of my wounds. [[User:Elbie|- Elbie]] 02:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 02:11, 5 August 2009
Oh boy... I know I shouldn't laugh, but I was chuckling throughout much of this. I hope you weren't too badly bitten! The way you make this sound, I think it almost qualifies for a MNIMB honorable mention!! Regarding the farming... I've noticed these square fields with circles in them on Google Maps/Earth many times. Is it irrigation that produces the circles? I find it a bit odd that they use a square grid of fields: hexagonal like a honeycomb would be more efficient. --macronencer 14:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- You are correct. I assume compactness is not a necessity. ;) -- relet 15:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- The circles are indeed from the irrigation -- you can read more about it here: [1] The land in Alberta was parceled into farms before this became the norm, thus the rectangular lands. And while hexagonal would be more efficient in theory, but it would be a pain in the ass to rezone the entire province, rebuild the roads, do all the paperwork, and avoid all the pitchforks. Albertans are afraid of change. - Elbie 16:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Alberta doesn't have mosquitoes. We have 747s that suck blood. --Meghan 15:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- Lol, true. I originally thought about writing it up as "semi-visible flying velociraptors" and then discarded the idea, not having any good shots of my wounds. - Elbie 02:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
