 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008Even Manhatten Project Wasn't "On the Fly" R&D
Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three decades before they started. Now with peak oil everyone wants really fundamental research done "on the wing." They want "new mature" green industries yesterday. I'm not saying that breakthroughs are impossible in this climate. "When a man knows he's going to be hung in a fortnight, it concentrates the mind wonderfully" applies to everyone. I'm just saying that attitude makes me really really nervous. Bret Cahill > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bret Cahill After the first oil shock we basically drilled our way out of it and didn't complete the research necessary for alternatives. We started down that road but set it aside as oil prices lowered and stabilized. The situation is different now. We virtually can't drill our way out this time. If we do again what we did in the 70's and put aside the necessary research and development we will really be in trouble in a few years. But, just because everyone wants instant mature "green industries," and that they are far from developed yet does not mean we should put aside that development. What we need is national leadership that understands this and is more interested in funding and pushing the development of alternative energy than waging war, for example. It's now a matter of national survival much more important than any of the silly terrorism nonsense ever was. It's now a matter of national security and survival. Most people seem to realize this to some degree, so I think we will begin down the right road. We must, however, guard against the naysayers and doom sayers who throw up countless obstacles and irrational objections for this or that self serving reason. We must stay focused on our ultimate goal of energy self sufficiency. > It's now a matter of national security and survival. Most people seem to > realize this to some degree, so I think we will begin down the right road. > We must, however, guard against the naysayers and doom sayers who throw up > countless obstacles and irrational objections for this or that self serving > reason. We must stay focused on our ultimate goal of energy self > sufficiency. And if we dont stay focused? The number of catastrophic alternative scenarios is large. Like a pending execution, its already concentrated the minds of some who dont see the kind of leadership that will be required to stabilize the situation. I dont see that the warnings here of impending global financial systemic breakdown are having any effect on the way sheeple think. If that's what you call it. I do see increasing numbers moving into my neck of Ozark woods, with new mcMansions and starter castles in view every time I drive to town or wherever. I dunno what to make of it Bob. The census bureau has a new class: the "x-urbs", those who've moved out of urban areas to the rural fringe to setup hobby farms with their retirement money. One clue is that high tech California finished the last fiscal year with $3 billion deficit, and low tech Arkansas ended with a $$919 million surplus. There may be other states that have the leadership to transition to some kind of alternative energy, ready to secede from the Union if the dollar tanks because of the lack of federal leadership. People thinking of survival are looking for communities that have a very diverse local resource base to support them in case the corruption and ineptitude of the federal system disintegrates. They are not waiting for the media to convince the electorate what must be done or who needs to do it. Re: Partial solution can be quickly done in the interim to knock the #$ %^&* oil down http://hometown.aol.com/__121b_jp62FVbkQiq65VmOdYqjhKor5EGWYhVZLB6sTLqP/Ciij9hJ31n6zA== From: Robert Cohen (robtcohen@aol.com.spam.no) Subject: Schmockems Razor: Traffic Jam This is the only article in this thread View: Original Format Newsgroups: alt.philosophy Date: 2003-01-20 18:38:02 PST NEWS & EVENTS 'If You Hate It, Why is This Concept Dumb?' A solution to our public-transportation woes By Randall Osborne Sick of traffic jams on the ozone-shrouded freeway into Atlanta? Tired of the backed-up clog on Pike Street heading through Lawrenceville? Robert Cohen has an idea. I like it. Cohen's partial solution to traffic woes is "obvious (at least to me)," he writes in a memo to county planners. But it hasn't been obvious to everyone else. Cohen, of Lawrenceville, is getting the word out. "Encouragement of reproduction in whole or part," he adds, fragmentally, to the two-page document. "Not copyrighted." His plan has a few hitches. Cohen admits that much, right off the bat. For example, to make it work, insurance companies would have to "reconfigure" the way they write liability policies. What's more, Atlanta and Fulton County -- which have monopolized the taxi and limo market -- would have to ease up a bit, and ... You're probably starting to figure it out. Anyway, once we bring the insurance companies in line and bust up the sweet deal held in place by chauffers in Fulton County, we can move on to Cohen's plan. Summed up, in his words, it's this: "Fare-payin' passengers." Old-timers will recall a bumper sticker along these lines, favored by ruffian hippies. The sticker bore a little rhyme that dealt with an anatomy part and with hemp, using slang vernacular for each and concluding that "nobody rides for free." In Cohen's world, few people would. "We need to reconceptualize," he writes. In the memo, Cohen reconceptualizes like all get out. "A major problem with facilitating the private vehicles carrying of paying passengers also has to do with crime potential," he writes. "One solution might be that potential paying passengers could carry picture ID (cards) and these ID (cards) could be scanned or checked via the vehicles' cellular telephones. Such a screening process would seemingly be of some expense, but it is a technological possibility to utilize." Under Cohen's plan, the driver would not be obliged to take anybody with a valid card. "There would be no requirement that a vehicle would carry just anybody who is unknown to the driver," he writes, which is a relief. "In the typical situations where the drivers and passengers are co-workers and/ or neighbors (thus known to each other), then no screening is needed anyway." No, but you could still charge them. That's the beauty of the plan. The car-pool moocher would be a phenomenon of the past. Nobody rides for free. Exact amounts owed could be calculated. "Electronic taxi meters themselves should now hopefully be cheaper because of efficiencies in electronics. Best Buy, et. al., might sell and install the things. Or the vehicles' odometers could be utilized along with (the) wristwatch, and a simple formula formulated." Cohen's memo is more than practical advice. He throws in a few opinions, too. "The perimeter highway in DeKalb County is becoming increasingly clogged," he declares. "I currently favor an outer perimeter, possibly as a toll road." Mostly, though, Cohen wants to guide officials through the process of clearing up the roads. "The concept is to encourage more semi-public/semi- private taxis, so that not as many cars are needed. The incentive system could help to solve the transportation problem -- if institutions and laws could appropriately be reconfigured." Ah, there's the rub. Cohen includes a series of questions in which he rails at conditions that he knows are bad. Very bad. "Is our society too crime- prone for this?" he asks, apparently in reference to the prospect of bogus ID cards. "Does the automotive industry want to sell less vehicles?" He seems to know the answer. "Isn't Gwinnett doomed to gridlock, no matter what? If you hate it, why is this concept dumb? Please critique." I'm no traffic planner, so I'm hardly qualified to critique. Plus, the memo wasn't addressed to me. I only got a copy. But, in the manner of a non-skeptic and optimist, I like Cohen's solutions. They suggest an earlier time of free enterprise, the pioneering spirit, rugged individualism and clean air -- not to mention ruffian hippies, who (unlike everyone else) were not altogether serious. It was a time when (unlike today) people didn't really mean it when they said: "Nobody rides for free." | Gwinnett Loaf Home | Copyright 1997 by Creative Loafing | Published Feb. 15, 1997 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Google Home - Advertise with Us - Search Solutions - Services & Tools - Jobs, Press, & Help ©2003 Google -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Google Home - Advertise with Us - Business Solutions - Services & Tools - Jobs, Press, & Help ©2003 Google My Favorite Links *** how to grow employment: 700 modular mini-factories My Favorite Products Free AOL! Try It Out Today! Download AOL Instant Messenger page created with 1-2-3 Publish A good idea. What it really needs is the right PR, not Martha Stewart but someone just as socially correct / influential. I do not deny I'm somewhat weak in that dept. Anyway back to the issue. Motorists see me cycling in the 115 degree heat out in the desert and pull over to offer me rides. But once I've made up my mind to heat cycle, then I'm only being polite when I accept. Bret Cahill > After the first oil shock we basically drilled our way out of it and didn't > complete the research necessary for alternatives. Though not ideal, this proves at least one point. Given that drilling out can besuccessful, we ought to do it again. But this time it likelywill be only a qualified success. That fact alone is NO reason to NOT do it. I don't think that anyone believes that it will be the RIGHT answer this time. But at least we will have some economic relief. Right now, we are the laughing stock of the world, first by botching the Iraq war and peace. Second by trying our best to buy our way out of (or into) oil dependence. The best we can hope for is a rapidly evolved hybrid manufavturing capabily and enouh oil discoveries to ge somewaht comfortable. The days are GONE when we used everdody else's oil at a discount. Now the rest of the world's producers want top price. SUV owners: retire that vehicle to just your Sunday drive to church . > We started down that road > but set it aside as oil prices lowered and stabilized. The situation is > different now. We virtually can't drill our way out this time. If we do > again what we did in the 70's and put aside the necessary research and > development we will really be in trouble in a few years. Get on your state and federal representative. Why those silly twits (all 500-odd of them) continue to defy drilling rights is a Nero like mystery (fiddling while the US economy tanks). > But, just because everyone wants instant mature "green industries," and that > they are far from developed yet does not mean we should put aside that > development. What we need is national leadership that understands this and > is more interested in funding and pushing the development of alternative > energy than waging war, for example. Hey, while you're at it, fund Rumplstilskin to restart his sinning flax into gold project. What with all our new knowledge and lasers.... who kknows??? > It's now a matter of national survival > much more important than any of the silly terrorism nonsense ever was. The "alternative energy" term is incomplete and a misnomer. It is not a different energy that we need, but rather an alternative SOURCE for the same energy, namely hydorcarbon fuel stock. > It's now a matter of national security and survival. Agreed > Most people seem to > realize this to some degree, so I think we will begin down the right road. Not if the Democrats get more power. They will TAX the existing fuels and be done with it. Their entire platform is based on the fairy tales of Global warming and the Green economy (never real, never achievable; a permanent football as is Race, for insance). "Alternative energy" will be no more successful than Johnson's war on povery (still in progress after 40 years and thhere remains just as much poverty than ever. Iraq looks like a clear win in comparison. A Pope once said "The poor will always be with us". Now more true than ever. Note that the poor do not disappear or die early; certainly never in this country. They always seem to survive til the next handout...) > We must, however, guard against the naysayers and doom sayers who throw up > countless obstacles and irrational objections for this or that self serving > reason. We must stay focused on our ultimate goal of energy self > sufficiency. That goal (alternative sources of hydrocarbon fuel) I accept as true real and feasible. Let's all get to that task, sans politics. Angelo Campanella > That goal (alternative sources of hydrocarbon fuel) I accept as true > real and feasible. Let's all get to that task, sans politics. Sans politics? Oh sure, THAT will be the day! Look! The very PROBLEM is politics. Vested interests. People hoping to make big money with scams (CO2), media fawning over really moronic "green people". and a total ignoring of viable solutions. There is a huge amount of coal. Liquification processes have been around since the last century and worked well enough for Hitler to keep WWII going much longer than anyone wanted. Electric cars run essentially on coal. How much fuel is used by people going to work each day? So why ignore electric cars just because they aren't full replacements for gas cars yet? For work/shopping trips you've saved that much oil! There is less natural gas but still enough to give some breathing room as coal problems are ironed out. My local gas company has run their ENTIRE fleet of cars and trucks on natural gas for years. Works just fine. No city blocks taken out by explosions. So what's the problem? Even lower pollution than gasoline. And for that matter my Geo metro gets 55 mpg on the highway and 45 in the city. What in hell happened to that "Technology"? My guess is that it's sort of like nobody knows how to make a decent mummy anymore either. The problem is politics. Everybody wants to "look" "green" even though all they do is look moronic. You have people "inventing" all manner of crap that even at a cursory glance is clear can't work. "Oh, once it gets developed [means we spend,,,no WASTE a ton of tax money on it] it'll work just fine!" Feh. How about we do this. We block some major streams and rivers and back up the water and then use it to power generators? Why not? I think I've just solved all our problems.... NOT. So long as those with an agenda are controlling the media spew, we are all in danger of a huge crash. Apparently those with this agenda and their minions seem to think they don't live in the same country we do. >> After the first oil shock we basically drilled our way out of it and >> didn't >> complete the research necessary for alternatives. > > Though not ideal, this proves at least one point. Given that > drilling out can besuccessful, we ought to do it again. <snip the rest of the same> Nether of you get it. A thousand barrels a second. There are no alternatives. Like whistling through the graveyard..... You two, of course, scare me..... >>> After the first oil shock we basically drilled our way out of it and >>> didn't [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Nether of you get it. A thousand barrels a second. There are no > alternatives. Like whistling through the graveyard..... Please clarify. Do you mean that: 1,000 barrels a second is a doomsday rate of fuel consumption (bad)? or such consuption cannot be replaced just by alternative fuels? or insisting on extending our consumpion of fossil fuels at all is bad? or something else? Angelo Campanella >>>> After the first oil shock we basically drilled our way out of it and >>>> didn't [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > 1,000 barrels a second is a doomsday rate of fuel consumption (bad)? or > such consuption cannot be replaced just by alternative fuels? It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 billion bl/year while consumption is currently 31 billion bl/year. You can't drill for what isn't there. > insisting on extending our consumpion of fossil fuels at all is bad? We can't extend what we don't have. Oil is not a limitless resource. > something else? The big one is that we are heading for declines in production of massive proportion compared to the growth in demand required to keep economies from caving. > It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is > nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 > billion bl/year while consumption is currently 31 billion bl/year. > You can't drill for what isn't there. "DB", the Dumb Bastard <abc@some.net> is a class 3 enviro, a little green idiot .... who parrots the green party line because he doesn't have sufficient education to think for himself, and that he has no clue how badly the green sh.ts are f.cking him. Here read again and try to grasp why 150'000 years of buried carbon, in any desirable form, at the present consumption rate, is *limitless* for normal people, who are not damaged goods like you are... Here it is again for your benefit and healing. Read the Para that starts with: Initially, "they" say the earth had...: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/1f25c61fc45ad11b?hl=en If you understand enough elementary chemistry, a light may turn on in your head. If not then resign yourself to the fact that you have fallen victim to the grand con that turned you into damaged goods... ahahahaha... ahaha...ahahahanson >> It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is >> nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "DB", the Dumb Bastard <abc@some.net> > is a class 3 enviro, a little green idiot .... Christ hanson. Do you need a link to Uncle Al's sunshine? >>> It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is >>> nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> "DB", the Dumb Bastard <abc@some.net> > Christ hanson. Do you need a link to Uncle Al's sunshine? hanson wrote that's exactly how you, "DB" do argue, since you look up and inside your own a.shole... ahahahahahaha... wherein they, the Green Turds and the Oil-boys, have painted their paradigm for you to follow and parrot to make even more victims from the machinations they perpetrated upon you and the peasantry. Now since you are very slow on the uptake read here where it says in: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/bb4dbe2a7fac0a34?hl=en ------- The C&CH politics ------- ....ahahaha... ahahanson >>>> It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is >>>> nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > hanson wrote > that's exactly how you, "DB" do argue Nope. Not if you show some numbers to back your rehtoric. Here, try this for starters: http://lakeweb.blogspot.com/ http://www.theoildrum.com/ > Now since you are very slow on the uptake read here where it > says in: > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/bb4dbe2a7fac0a34?hl=en But there is no content in this link. only arguments for argument's sake... hahahaha... hanson wrote: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/7dec22d709f02903?hl=en wherein it says: "....thanks for the laughs and the money... ahahaha.." and now again, Dan ... thanks for the MONEY... ahahahahanson > > It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is > > nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Here it is again for your benefit and healing. Read the > Para that starts with: Initially, "they" say the earth had...: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/1f25c61fc45ad11b?hl= en > If you understand enough elementary chemistry, a light may > turn on in your head. If not then resign yourself to the fact > that you have fallen victim to the grand con that turned you > into damaged goods... ahahahaha... ahaha...ahahahanson Hanson, Don't you have anything better to do than your record stuck on the 150,000 years of oil that we supposedly have ? Ever heard of carbonates ? They are minerals that store carbon. Lots of it. Oil (carbohydrates in general) is just an extremely rare occurance of carbon that luckily survived the millions of years of terrestrial transformations. It is time that you tell us WHERE we can find these carbohydrates that you rave about, or simply stop repeating the same lie. > Hanson, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It is time that you tell us WHERE we can find these carbohydrates that you > rave about, or simply stop repeating the same lie. Hanson: BAWHAWHAWHAWHWAHAWHHAW. | > > It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is | > > nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] | > Here it is again for your benefit and healing. Read the | > Para that starts with: Initially, "they" say the earth had...: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/1f25c61fc45ad11b?hl= | en | > If you understand enough elementary chemistry, a light may [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] | It is time that you tell us WHERE we can find these carbohydrates that you | rave about, or simply stop repeating the same lie. It's COAL he's talking about, you fuckin' idiot. "try to grasp why 150'000 years of buried carbon" > It's COAL he's talking about, you fuckin' idiot. http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/2396 But then, you 'believe'........ AHAHAHA... green Carbohydrates, bedekkered... ahahaha.. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/04d763eacfc4ad19?hl=en > | > > It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. > | > > There is nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries > | > > are running some 5 billion bl/year while consumption is > | > > currently 31 billion bl/year. You can't drill for what isn't there. hanson wrote: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/04d763eacfc4ad19?hl=en > | > "DB", the Dumb Bastard <abc@some.net> > | > is a class 3 enviro, a little green idiot .... [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > | > that you have fallen victim to the grand con that turned you > | > into damaged goods... ahahahaha... ahaha...ahahahanson Class 3 enviro Dekker, the green pecker wrote > | Hanson, > | Don't you have anything better to do than your record stuck on [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > It's COAL he's talking about, you fuckin' idiot. > "try to grasp why 150'000 years of buried carbon" hanson wrote: Right, Andro, but take it easy on Bob Decker who is just a silly green pecker... which is what he is thinking with and so it is understandable that he does not understand the simplest High School chem. These two posters above, Bob and Dan, are valued assets of mine because these "fuckin' idiots" are making me money through their beliefs and fears.. in that they keep the prices of the C&H commodities high.... ahahaha... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/04d763eacfc4ad19?hl=en Bob, "carbohydrates"?.... hahahaha... ... ahahaha... So, Bob, you mean that you are so densely green that you do not know where to get "carbohydrates" from? "It is time that I tell you WHERE"... ahahaha... How about the supermarket or the grocery store where you can buy them in form of cereal, bread, sugar etc.. and for YOUR joy and benefit a green colored lollie-pop!.... or you can get them in all types of fruits and veggies in case you are a vegan, bent green that way... Oh, BTW, .... ahahahaha.... don't eat any veggies that are more than a few weeks old, and much less the ones that have undergone "millions of years of terrestrial transformations. Bob, thanks for the laughs and the $$$$$.... ahahaha... ... ahahahaha... ahahahanson PS: Andro, thanks for the post. I would have missed this gem... ahahahahaha.... | AHAHAHA... green Carbohydrates, bedekkered... ahahaha.. | > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] | > | > Here it is again for your benefit and healing. Read the | > | > Para that starts with: Initially, "they" say the earth had...: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/1f25c61fc45ad11b?hl= | > | en | > | > If you understand enough elementary chemistry, a light may [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] | Andro, thanks for the post. I would have missed | this gem... ahahahahaha.... You sweet-talk 'em, I'll hustle 'em. We play "good cop, bad cop", they are still fuckin' idiots and I'm still having fun. (And I wanna be bad cop.) AHAHAHAHAHAHA.... Good Cop / Bad Cop... AHAHAHA... > | AHAHAHA... green Carbohydrates, bedekkered... ahahaha.. > | > [quoted text clipped - 80 lines] > We play "good cop, bad cop", they are still fuckin' idiots > and I'm still having fun. (And I wanna be bad cop.) hanson wrote: Yes you may, Andro... Keep whuppin' their green arses! ahahahaha.. Thanks for the laughs... aahahahanson | AHAHAHAHAHAHA.... Good Cop / Bad Cop... AHAHAHA... | > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] | > | > | > Here it is again for your benefit and healing. Read the | > | > | > Para that starts with: Initially, "they" say the earth had...: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/1f25c61fc45ad11b?hl= | > | > | en | > | > | > If you understand enough elementary chemistry, a light may [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] | Yes you may, Andro... Keep whuppin' their green arses! | ahahahaha.. Thanks for the laughs... aahahahanson As long as we laugh, hahahanson, we are ALIVE! f.ck the gods, f.ck the stupid mentality of the dingleberries, death comes to us all and there is f.ck-all we can do about it. (Except there is, and nobody tries. I plead guilty, I have not tried enough. I knew this when I was 13 years old and let myself down. Oh to be that age and know then what I know now. Alas, it does not work that way.) So we laugh and say "f.ck it". And we die. .... > | > | Bob, "carbohydrates"?.... hahahaha... ... ahahaha... > | > | So, Bob, you mean that you are so densely green that [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > now. Alas, it does not work that way.) > So we laugh and say "f.ck it". And we die. Ever watched Brother Bear ? There are these two moose.... > > > It can't be reasonably be replaced in the current paradym. There is > > > nothing to, as you put it, 'drill out'. Discoveries are running some 5 [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Don't you have anything better to do than your record stuck on the 150,000 > years of oil that we supposedly have ? Those issues still amaze many people. Since digital systems, silicon graphics, A.I., WWW, Mars landers, satellites, GPS, lasers, PV Cells, HDTV, Tidal Enegy, Wind Energy, and Robots were mostly invented because of the cranks stuck on 150,000 years of anything: oil, nuclear, gas, electric, elevators, or whatever. > Ever heard of carbonates ? They are minerals that store carbon. Lots of it. > Oil (carbohydrates in general) is just an extremely rare occurance of carbon [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bret Cahill Nuclear power has been around for how long? How big are the US coal reserves? How long has coal liquefaction been around? The problem isn't technology, it is the lack of investment in what we already know how to do. --Mike Jr > > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > --Mike Jr For good or for ill, it's more politics than investment that keeps us from doing all we know how to do. For sure we know how to do nuclear power but try to get one licensed these days. That may change with energy costs so high, but the politics of it have kept nuclear power off of the list since the 1970's. We are still building coal fired plants but they are burping more and more CO2 into the atmosphere and are under increasing scrutiny. If so called "clean coal" ever really happens where the CO2 can be captured, then you might see coal liquification and other processes added to the mix. Right now the politics of coal are poison. Bret is talking about green sources at reasonable prices that don't impact food. Furthermore they need to be storable and convenient to use and should, if possible, fuel existing equipment with little or no modification. It's a tall order, that's why we need research. > > > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > > > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > For good or for ill, it's more politics than investment that keeps us from > doing all we know how to do. The politics is preventing the investment. > For sure we know how to do nuclear power but try to get one licensed these > days. That may change with energy costs so high, but the politics of it have > kept nuclear power off of the list since the 1970's. > > We are still building coal fired plants but they are burping more and more > CO2 into the atmosphere and are under increasing scrutiny. Check my recent appends in sci.physics. My investigation has led me to conclude that CO2 AGW is physically not possible. That is, the science behind AGW is deeply flawed. Therefore I see no reason for a green energy policy. > If so called > "clean coal" ever really happens where the CO2 can be captured, then you [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > if possible, fuel existing equipment with little or no modification. It's a > tall order, that's why we need research. The politics of green energy have led to high energy costs and mass starvation, all to prevent a CO2 induced run away global warming which can't happen because it violates the laws of physics. BTW, your reply was very courteous and I appreciate it. --Mike Jr > > For sure we know how to do nuclear power but try to get one licensed these > > days. That may change with energy costs so high, but the politics of it have > > kept nuclear power off of the list since the 1970's. And the real problems is what to do with nuclear waste that lives essentially forever. My vote is to just build the plants and ship all the waste to Alabama. > > We are still building coal fired plants but they are burping more and more > > CO2 into the atmosphere and are under increasing scrutiny. Not the problem. CO2 is a POLITICAL problem, namely how to stop all the lies about CO2 causing AGW. The REAL problem with coal is all the OTHER nasty pollutants like heavy metals. Unfortunately the CO2 boondoggle has shunted money that SHOULD have desperately gone to the coal pollutants problem into a non-problem where there is a political agenda and big money to be made. > Check my recent appends in sci.physics. My investigation has led me > to conclude that CO2 AGW is physically not possible. That is, the > science behind AGW is deeply flawed. Therefore I see no reason for a > green energy policy. Well the "reason" is spelled "political agenda" It's funny that what with a bunch of us screaming about CO2 AGW not being possible the AGW crowd and now shifted gears to some bogus "feedback theory" to explain how the impossible really is true. It would really be funny if so much money and the fate of the world were not involved! >>> For sure we know how to do nuclear power but try to get one licensed these >>> days. That may change with energy costs so high, but the politics of it have >>> kept nuclear power off of the list since the 1970's. > > And the real problems is what to do with nuclear waste that lives > essentially forever. The problem is political, not technical. It can be very safely vitrified and dropped into the mariana trench. Couldn't resist juxtaposing these: > What we need is national leadership that understands this and > is more interested in funding and pushing the development of alternative > energy than waging war, for example. It's now a matter of national > survival much more important than any of the silly terrorism nonsense > ever was. And, > For good or for ill, it's more politics than investment that keeps us > from doing all we know how to do. I assume that by "national leadership" you mean gummint, right? But gummint entails politics, which you admit is, far from being a source of solutions, an obstacle to them. If you want to see solutions to the energy "crisis," you'd be well-advised to insist that gummint keep its hands off. No practical means of producing energy has ever been conceived or developed by gummints, or under the "leadership" of gummints. > Couldn't resist juxtaposing these: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > energy has ever been conceived or developed by gummints, or under the > "leadership" of gummints. Not true at all. All of the major projects accomplished by this country had the government behind them, running them and financing them. Here's a few: The Manhattan project to build the Atomic Bomb. The proposal and funding of the interstate highway system. The building and running of the locks and dams on major rivers like the Mississippi. The design and building of Hoover Dam. and other large dams, the TVA, the Apollo program to go to the moon. All of NASA. and on and on. Private industry works at the contract level, but NEVER conceives, designs and builds these major undertakings on their own. They just don't work that way and never have. If you elect people who don't think government can do a good job and you put them in charge of stuff, they f.ck up...What do you expect? That's exactly what we see with the Bush admin., Katrina is a classic example. These people, apparently like you, don't believe in government and their running of it illustrates what happens when such people are put in charge. Would you hire a cabinet maker who didn't like to work with wood and thought wood bad stuff or an electrician who didn't like to work with electricity? That's exactly what we've done with government, put people in it who don't believe in it and that's pretty damn stupid when you think about it. Government is THE PEOPLE and when properly manned works great. It has done so in the past and will again. But, we have to be sure not to elect bozos who don't think it can work or believe in it. Simple as that. > Not true at all. All of the major projects accomplished by this country had > the government behind them, running them and financing them. Here's a few: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > them in charge of stuff, they f.ck up...What do you expect? That's exactly > what we see with the Bush admin., Katrina is a classic example. These . But, we have to be sure not to elect bozos > who don't think it can work or believe in it. Simple as that.- Hide quoted text - From Osher Doctorow: I don't believe in either Big Government or Big Corporations, but rather Small Corporations except in a few critical industries like Self-Defense. Senator Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota and Senator Kefauver of Tennessee were the main representatives of this viewpoint, but lost to Utopians of the Left and Right who thought that Big Government was either much better than Big Corporations or that Big Corporations somehow prevented the excesses of Big Government in Nazi Germany or the USSR by making 10 Wrongs or 1000 Wrongs equal to One Right through their competition. Most people think that Small Corporations are a product of "thinking small" and are simply Big Corporations that haven't grown up yet. One-Person or Ma-and-Pa or even 2-Person Partnership (usually involving relatives) Small Corporations have a number of motivational advantages: 1) Nobody is divided into "Employer" versus "Employee" or "Manager/ Owner" versus "Managed people" divisions. 2) Each Individual benefits from his/her own work, period/end of story. 3) Small Corporations of the above types do work, and in fact there are millions of them underlying the USA and U.K. economies including grocers, mechanics, plumbers, architects, accountants, electricians, handimen, lawyers, notaries, troubleshooters, tutors, designers, private inventors, detectives, independent truckers, etc. 4) Small Corporations eliminate automatically Job-Stealing by Illegal Aliens, outsourcing, trade with the Enemy, merging-downsizing-layoffs, workers who "ride" their Jobs doing almost nothing (especially in some Civil Service Departments or sales companies when the boss isn't looking), etc. I don't think that the Democrats are more likely than the Republicans to support Small Corporations. For example, Clinton's Election on Job Promises changed within 3 months after his Election to Gore's green environment program, and Clinton never looked back and closed his eyes to the largest merging-downsizing-layoffs in USA history. Osher Doctorow [snip] > From Osher Doctorow: > > I don't believe in either Big Government or Big Corporations, but > rather Small Corporations > except in a few critical industries like Self-Defense. Senator Hubert > Humphrey The Hump? The little smiling bonbon from Minnesota for whom others' sacrifices were always niggardly? President "Landslide Lyndon" Baines Johnson's cabin boy? Oh cabin boy, Oh cabin boy, You dirty little nipper! You lined your a.s with broken glass And circumcized the skipper! The Hump devalued dime blow jobs. The Hump was all about Czechago. Here's three little hints from Uncle Al, 1) Beating Media representatives with police truncheons, handcuffing them, then loading paddy wagons and Chemical Macing them before closing and locking the doors sums to a bad, stooopid, Government thing. 2) Doing (1) on national television is much worse. 3) Having clouds of tear gas sucked into hotel air intakes and into Vice President and Presidential candidate Hubert Horatio Hymphrey's lavish hotel suite is priceless. Czechago - the city that works! Mayor Daley said so. Remember what Abbie Hoffman yelled at Judge Julius Hoffman" "Shanda far di goyim!"  SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 > > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Nuclear power has been around for how long? It doesn't matter, as the coal idiots are often told. Since the it's computers, lasers, satellites, A.I. and robots, that are the dfference bewteen nuclear power and coal idiots. > How big are the US coal reserves? How long has coal liquefaction been > around? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > --Mike Jr > The problem isn't technology, it is the lack of investment in what we > already know how to do. Yup, there is lots of coal. Eough to bring the Co2 level of the atmosphere to levels that are lethal to most animal life. Do you think you have a point? >>The problem isn't technology, it is the lack of investment in what we >>already know how to do. > Yup, there is lots of coal. Eough to bring the Co2 level of the > atmosphere to levels that are lethal to most animal life. Hey, have you heard that some scientists now believe that one of the the causes of the slight temperature rise observed in recent years is the REMOVAL of contaminatis and particulates (industrial smoke) from the atmosphere via decades of EPA cleanups. The clear air is a better insulator. This agrees with the Krakatoa expplosion effect in the late 19th century where so much dust and SO2 was ejected into the atmosphere that observable cooling occurred for a year. I also believe that the increasing carbon dioxide will act to some extent like the smoke in that the CO2 (like SO2 may have done then) will act to reduce the thermal insulation value of pure air. In particular, in the upper atmosphere where CO2 is the only means to radiate off heat at nght. Whence colder winrers . Angelo Campanella > Hey, have you heard that some scientists now believe that one of the the > causes of the slight temperature rise observed in recent years is the > REMOVAL of contaminatis and particulates (industrial smoke) from the > atmosphere via decades of EPA cleanups. The clear air is a better > insulator. Well, lets see.. MMMM ya. It's only been in the scientific literature for the last 50 years. MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNN On Jul 9, 3:37 am, "V for Vendicar" <Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Yup, there is lots of coal. Eough to bring the Co2 level of the > atmosphere to levels that are lethal to most animal life. We won't even have to wait for the coal so long as we keep letting the Banksters burn the rain forests. Apparently they seem to think that they are not oxygen breathing animals. Yeah, that's it. lets burn the rain forests so we can grow corn for ethanol. (for a few years) That's be "green" for sure. > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I'm just saying that attitude makes me really really nervous. It's the politicians and 'greens' that make ME nervous. Not a clue between them. Graham > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bret Cahill 1) Go to the Colorado high desert. 2) Define a block of subterranean oil shale 100x100x100 m^3, about 2 million metric tonnes. 3) Mine out about 10%, then blast to fragment the chimney. 4) Light the top like a cigarette, blow in air, and put a drip pan at the bottom. 5) As the top burns down on residual char the oil shale below pyrolyzes and releases its hydrocarbon content. 6) A good week and a rich vein obtains about 0.27 million metric tonnes of shale oil. That is about 1.9 million bbl of oil. 7) Declare bankruptcy. Shale oil is rich with rock dust that wears away elbows and valves like sand blasting. It is about 3% nitrogen and 20 ppm arsenic, the perfect poison for reforming catalyst - nitrogen kills acidic zeolite, arsenic kills noble metal catalysts. If you get all that fixed shale oil is also heavily unsaturated, loaded with olefin. The hydrogen needed for bond saturation will bankrupt you. Oh yeah... oil shale is not shale, it is calcareous marlstone low rank coal. The stuff left behind after burning is rich with lime. It will run pH 14 groundwater pretty much forever - the solution to acid mine drainage! Ignite Colorado, truck the effluent to the National Petroleum Reserve, end Colorado molybdenite mine acid effluent, save America! It's a no-brainer. $10 billion ought to do it for starters. Hve prison chain gangs do the preparative mining to keep costs down. SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > decades before they started. But, even better, they knew there were neutrons three decades before they started. Since E=MC^2 also supposedly applies to supercomputers, if the idiot relativers could ever bring themselves to think about history rather simply babbling about it. > Now with peak oil everyone wants really fundamental research done "on > the wing." [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Bret Cahill > > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > could ever bring themselves to think about history rather simply > babbling about it. [snip crap] Hey bozo - the Manhattan Project had more Jews/m^2 than a Nazi concentration camp. The National Energy Crisis! has http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qualified.jpg SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 > "zzbun...@netscape.net" wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Hey bozo - the Manhattan Project had more Jews/m^2 than a Nazi > concentration camp. The National Energy Crisis! has It doesn't matter how many jews the moron Manhattan Project had. We got GPS, we got Lasers, we got Space Shuttles, and we got MIIRVs, and we got Cruise Missiles, and we got adaptive A.I. and we got Robots. and we DVD+RW, and the moron Jews got Woody Alllen, New Dork City and a bunch of Russian retards. > http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qualified.jpg > > -- > Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ > (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 >> > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three >> > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Hey bozo - the Manhattan Project had more Jews/m^2 than a Nazi > concentration camp. The National Energy Crisis! has Uncle Al makes a good point when he points out that as Jews had massacred the Russian Royal Family and co-opted the Russian government, and were using Russia as a base from where to instigate the Class Wars of the 1900's Jews were not trusted by America's leadership, so many Jewish scientists who were not trusted were shipped to a remote, isolated New Mexico location and assigned the simplest part of the Atomic Bomb program, while the heavy work was done by people like Fermi and Lawrence in places like New York, Chicago, Hanford and Oak Ridge. Some Jewish scientists who were not trusted, like Einstein, were not given Secret Clearances and assigned to military projects, perhaps because the FBI needed a few prominent Jews who appeared to have access to military secrets to roam with apparent freedom so the FBI could spot potential spy networks. Even then, as it turns out, the best design for the trigger was put forward by a non-Jewish explosive technician. It is interesting to see that although America took great pains to protect its' secrets, that a few Jews like Fuchs and the Rosenbergs still managed to pass along America's secrets to the Jews who controlled the Russian government. Thanks to my pal Uncle Al for demonstrating this example of Institutionalized Revisionism. SignatureTom Potter http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/ http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** >>>> Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three >>>> decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > to roam with apparent freedom > so the FBI could spot potential spy networks. It was not the fact he was untrusted. It was his sillyness about simultaneity. His relativity of simultaneity was totally ignored of course.. because.. it would not haved worked if they did not ignore such bullshit about simulteniety not being the same for everyone. :) > Even then, as it turns out, > the best design for the trigger was put forward by > a non-Jewish explosive technician. Yup a simultaneous trigger. Go figure.. a thing relativity thinks can't occur at all because of two different observers will not see the simultaneous flashes at the same times. anyone thinking about what was seen instead of what actually occurs.. were pushed to the lower levels. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >> > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three >> > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Hey bozo - the Manhattan Project had more Jews/m^2 than a Nazi > concentration camp. The National Energy Crisis! has Uncle Al makes a good point when he points out that as Jews had massacred the Russian Royal Family and co-opted the Russian government, and were using Russia as a base from where to instigate the Class Wars of the 1900's Jews were not trusted by America's leadership, so many Jewish scientists who were not trusted were shipped to a remote, isolated New Mexico location and assigned the simplest part of the Atomic Bomb program, while the heavy work was done by people like Fermi and Lawrence in places like New York, Chicago, Hanford and Oak Ridge. Some Jewish scientists who were not trusted, like Einstein, were not given Secret Clearances and assigned to military projects, perhaps because the FBI needed a few prominent Jews who appeared to have access to military secrets to roam with apparent freedom so the FBI could spot potential spy networks. Even then, as it turns out, the best design for the trigger was put forward by a non-Jewish explosive technician. It is interesting to see that although America took great pains to protect its' secrets, that a few Jews like Fuchs and the Rosenbergs still managed to pass along America's secrets to the Jews who controlled the Russian government. Thanks to my pal Uncle Al for demonstrating another example of Institutionalized Revisionism. -- Tom Potter http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/ http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos > "When a man knows he's going to be hung in a fortnight, it > concentrates the mind wonderfully" applies to everyone. > > I'm just saying that attitude makes me really really nervous. Culture of fear is a term that refers to a perceived prevalence of fear and anxiety in public discourse and relationships, and how this may affect the way people interact with one another as individuals and as democratic agents. Mean World Syndrome is a phenomenon whereby the violence-related content of mass media convinces viewers that the world is more dangerous than it actually is, and prompts a desire for more protection than is warranted by any actual threat. Mean World Syndrome is one of the main effects of Cultivation theory. The term "risk society" is not intended to imply an increase of risk in society, but rather a society that is organized in response to risk. 'It is a society increasingly preoccupied with the future (and also with safety), which generates the notion of risk' (Giddens 1999: 3) Risk can be defined in the risk society as a systematic way of dealing with hazards and insecurities induced and introduced by modernization itself (Beck 1992: 21). While humans have always been subjected to a level of risk, modern society is exposed to a particular type of risk that is the result of the modernization process itself, altering social organization. There are risks such as natural disasters that have always had negative effects on human populations, but these are seen to be produced by non- human forces. Modern risks, on the other hand, are the product of human activity. These two different types of risk can be referred to as external risks and manufactured risks (Giddens, 1999). A risk society is predominantly concerned with manufactured risks. The marked difference between the two is that there is a significant level of human agency operating in the production and mitigation of manufactured risks. Media circus describes a news event where the media coverage is perceived to be out of proportion to the event being covered, such as the number of reporters at the scene, the amount of news media published or broadcast, and the level of media hype. The term is meant to critique the media by comparing it to a circus and, as such, is an idiom and not an objective observation. Media hype, orgy and frenzy are similar terms used in reference to a critique of news and entertainment media. Mass hysteria, also called collective hysteria, mass psychogenic illness, or collective obsessional behavior, is the sociopsychological phenomenon of the manifestation of the same or similar hysterical symptoms by more than one person. A common manifestation of mass hysteria occurs when a group of people believe they are suffering from a similar disease or ailment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_fear http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_world_syndrome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_Society http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_hype http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_hysteria > Bret Cahill > Mean World Syndrome is a phenomenon whereby the violence-related > content of mass media convinces viewers that the world is more > dangerous than it actually is, and prompts a desire for more > protection than is warranted by any actual threat. Mean World Syndrome > is one of the main effects of Cultivation theory. Gush hyping "9/11 changed EEEEVERYthing," making all kids out to be gang members and Hollywood movies on home invaders are just 3 of many examples. They also engage in the converse conjugate as well, "merely" omitting real concerns. Any demagoguery for a buck. But it's not related to my concerns. The corp. whore media aren't going around saying things like, "basic research takes more time than what'll take to survive peak oil." Bret Cahill > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bret Cahill Too little too late. Let's face it, as a species, we ain't gonna make it! We will either f.ck the world up over some idiotic religious/ ideological argument and blow the sh.t out of each other, or we will just wind down when the oil and other fossil fuels are used up. We can always go back to hunting and gathering! The most dangerous time for nuclear holocaust will be when the resource gap will begin to tighten. The Western powers will find increasing numbers of excuses to invade, destabilise and control the dwindling resources. Within 30 years there will be US troops in a radioactive Iran. > Too little too late. > Let's face it, as a species, we ain't gonna make it! [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > dwindling resources. Within 30 years there will be US troops in a > radioactive Iran. You know why there are no Iranians on Star Trek? Cause Star Trek is about the future. As for the Jews? That's the Ferengi. But, right now, I'm about half way thru "Infidel" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The Iranians have a lotta jackass company. And while the Africans, Arabs, and other Moslems are outbreeding everyone else, we know that booms tend to go to bust. I've been having some fun telling Liberals that in a one-man/one-vote system, they are outbreeding everyone else and will elect what passes for leadership. The Serbs figured out that's what the Catholic Croats and Albanian Muslims were up to, and found Malosevic, a true patriot, to deal with it for them, and as Machiavelli said, taking the guilt for the action away with him while they get to enjoy the fruits of the new status quo; in this case, a relatively pure Serbia. But what Ayaan shows us going on among the Muslim clerics in Africa and Saudi Arabia looks a lot like what's going on with US Christian fundies. And while these jackasses can get a lotta stupid sheeple behind them, they cant really organize and kind of innovative responses to new or unexpected challenges, such as the decline of oil production. And yes, I spoze the most of the planet is headed for famine. But when you look at the collapse of empires all thru history, you'll repeatedly find some communities that figured out what was coming down, and made the most of the opportunity to rid themselves of taxes that were no longer doing them any good. I might suggest also, that the nuke thing is, if you'll pardon the pun, overblown. The power elites have a vested interest in scaring us about nukes, but the fact is you havta take a nuke down off the shelf every 18 months to refine the lead out of it. (remember radioactive decay?) And as we see with Katrina, the MPLS bridge, the f.cked up way the wars are being run, and similar kinds of ineptitude in Russia, I aint so sure they can really organize enuf competent people to make nukes any more. Not that I'd want to live in a city to see. But you dont have to. There is ongoing investment in small towns and cities that have populations that dont move around as much because all their kin live there. Employee turnover is lower, and transnats have figured that out. Remember Blade Runner? Critical infrastructure is quietly being moved out of the high risk urban areas into rural obscurity. What else would you do about WMD? > > Too little too late. > > Let's face it, as a species, we ain't gonna make it! [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > As for the Jews? > That's the Ferengi. Star Trek was devised when Russia was the great foe. Klingons represented them, and by the time of Peristroika, Klingons were at peace with the Feds. Perhaps you would like to account for the fact that the Ferengi were unknon in the time of Kirk? Maybe the Jews didn't exist either. In any event there are plenty of candidates for the Iranians. And I think it is easy to take this idea too far. > But, right now, I'm about half way thru "Infidel" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. > The Iranians have a lotta jackass company. And while the Africans, > Arabs, and other Moslems are outbreeding everyone else, we know that > booms tend to go to bust. Look to your own shores for that, and see my thread on "Proud to be American". The crack are begining to show and the credit crunch is gonna change things in a big way. America's time may be coming to a close. It will be accelerated if it keeps up the military pretence that it simply cannot afford whilst it slips away from the top of the standard of living index to become a "developing country". The NeoCons have to realise that you have to spread money for the economy to work; concentrating it at the top gives you a banana repulblic. > I've been having some fun telling Liberals that in a one-man/one-vote > system, they are outbreeding everyone else and will elect what passes [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > action away with him while they get to enjoy the fruits of the new > status quo; in this case, a relatively pure Serbia. Irrelevant BS > But what Ayaan shows us going on among the Muslim clerics in Africa and > Saudi Arabia looks a lot like what's going on with US Christian fundies. > And while these jackasses can get a lotta stupid sheeple behind them, > they cant really organize and kind of innovative responses to new or > unexpected challenges, such as the decline of oil production. So what? > And yes, I spoze the most of the planet is headed for famine. But when > you look at the collapse of empires all thru history, you'll repeatedly > find some communities that figured out what was coming down, and made > the most of the opportunity to rid themselves of taxes that were no > longer doing them any good. Twat! Low tax is a recipe for economic disaster. > I might suggest also, that the nuke thing is, if you'll pardon the pun, > overblown. The power elites have a vested interest in scaring us about [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > being run, and similar kinds of ineptitude in Russia, I aint so sure > they can really organize enuf competent people to make nukes any more. Irrelevant BS > Not that I'd want to live in a city to see. But you dont have to. There > is ongoing investment in small towns and cities that have populations > that dont move around as much because all their kin live there. Employee > turnover is lower, and transnats have figured that out. Remember Blade > Runner? Critical infrastructure is quietly being moved out of the high > risk urban areas into rural obscurity. What else would you do about WMD? Irrelevant BS > Star Trek was devised when Russia was the great foe. Klingons > represented them, and by the time of Peristroika, Klingons were at > peace with the Feds. Perhaps you would like to account for the fact > that the Ferengi were unknon in the time of Kirk? Maybe the Jews > didn't exist either. > In any event there are plenty of candidates for the Iranians. Well According to the KKKonservatives at the Wall Street Journal, Bush is Batman. Yup, the AmeriKKKan people are now so stupid, that even their business leadership has to have the world presented to them in Comic Book Form. I know several people who managed various U.S. businesses, and they inform me that without training comic books, they could never train their Illiterate, Dysfunctional, AmeriKKKan Employees.. You know. Here in the Socialist states - we can read technical manuals, and don't need to have them predigested into comic book form. Ahahahahahahahaah >> You know why there are no Iranians on Star Trek? >> Cause Star Trek is about the future. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > In any event there are plenty of candidates for the Iranians. > And I think it is easy to take this idea too far. Damn Chaz, you took the f.cking joke literally. >> But, right now, I'm about half way thru "Infidel" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. >> The Iranians have a lotta jackass company. And while the Africans, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > economy to work; concentrating it at the top gives you a banana > repulblic. The voice in her film on youtube is American, not British English. The book, which among other things, shows the failure of Dutch liberalism, which is far left of the American version, to deal effectively with Islamic immigrants. The book, Infidel makes it clear to me that we need to get away from partisan group think to see WTF is going on. >> I've been having some fun telling Liberals that in a one-man/one-vote >> system, they are outbreeding everyone else and will elect what passes [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> status quo; in this case, a relatively pure Serbia. > Irrelevant BS Read Milgram's studies on obedience. He showed how Americans will follow orders just like Nazis did. >> But what Ayaan shows us going on among the Muslim clerics in Africa and >> Saudi Arabia looks a lot like what's going on with US Christian fundies. >> And while these jackasses can get a lotta stupid sheeple behind them, >> they cant really organize and kind of innovative responses to new or >> unexpected challenges, such as the decline of oil production. > So what? So, while the climb to Hubbard's peak oil followed a smooth bell curve, coming down off it will be precipitous. We need to invest less in golden parachutes and figure out how to hang on while we endow innovation to find a way to get down to some sustainable level of energy. >> And yes, I spoze the most of the planet is headed for famine. But when >> you look at the collapse of empires all thru history, you'll repeatedly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Twat! Low tax is a recipe for economic disaster. Denmark, Sweden, Holland, & Germany, to name a few, have high taxes, but then high incomes. For middle class people. They dont reward the power elites like the economies you admire. Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya, et al, have lower taxes than here if you like low taxes. >> I might suggest also, that the nuke thing is, if you'll pardon the pun, >> overblown. The power elites have a vested interest in scaring us about [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> they can really organize enuf competent people to make nukes any more. > Irrelevant BS I see you've not had the time to read Gibbon or Machiavelli either. Did Orwell slip your mind as well? Suffice to say that we have an unstable situation, and determining what will be relevant determines success, or even survival. When a situation is intractable, the usual reason is that you dont really understand it. >> Not that I'd want to live in a city to see. But you dont have to. There >> is ongoing investment in small towns and cities that have populations [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> risk urban areas into rural obscurity. What else would you do about WMD? > Irrelevant BS If you dont need to make investments or try to build a career, spoze so. I see however, that NW Arkansas now has a net IMMIGRATION of engineers and scientific professionals from California and other high tech areas. If you are young enuf to still have a future, it is relevant. >> Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three >> decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > dwindling resources. Within 30 years there will be US troops in a > radioactive Iran. Hydrogen is not the most abundant thing in the universe, stupidity is. It is clear that, like Bush, most people are ignorant of the consequences of instigating Iraq or Russia into a war. It amazes me to see people in the media, in government, in the military, and idiots posting on the net, smugly talking about Invading Iran, and having American troops waging war with people all over the world. The fact of the matter is, if America attacked either Iran or Russia, or if Iran or Russia seriously thought that America was going to invade either of those nations, they wouldn't sit still for a moment. They would take out the oil shipping infrastructure in the Persian Gulf, and America and Western Europe will begin a rapid decline back into the stone age. Also Russia would immediate shut off the natural gas to Western Europe, and Argentina would cease shipping oil to America. The reason Germany lost WWII, was because the Russian sabotaged their oil wells, and Germany couldn't get enough oil to support their military and factories. The Germans couldn't get to the Middle East oil, but made a effort in that direction to tie up Allied troops to prevent them from doing so. If the Persian Gulf oil shipping infrastructure were taken out, America would be in far worse shape than Germany was, because America's economy and military consumes far more energy, and the people America wants to wage war against are much farther away than Moscow was from Germany. There is about 59 days of import protection in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and a maximum of 4.4 million barrels per day can be withdrawn. Considering that America uses 20 million barrels per day, it does not take a system engineer to comprehend that if Iran and/or Russia destroys the oil shipping infrastructure in the Persian Gulf America, will come to a screeching halt. Perhaps one of these saber rattlers to explain to me how to maintain America, and wage a war that would be many times more costly in oil, material, limbs, and lives, than the Iraqi War. No gas to wage the war. No gas to rebuild the oil shipping infrastructure. No gas for cars, trucks and buses. No heating and cooling for your homes. No electricity for your computers. No gas to operate the farms, factories, and trucks. In fact, if Saddam had considered what would happen to him, his family and his country, he would have taken out the oil infrastructure in Iraq, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf. The ONLY rational options in today's world, are conservation and live and let live. It is INSANITY to even consider waging wars that consume large amounts of energy, or wars that will force the enemy to disrupt the supply of energy. About ten nations have the capability of taking out the World's energy supply, and make it impossible for a major war to be waged against them or anyone, and after seeing what happened to Saddam, there is no doubt that several of the nations would use the "Dooms Day Strategy", as they would have nothing to lose. They would be bombed, but not occupied. SignatureTom Potter http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/ http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** > > Not to diminish the bomb effort but at least they knew E=mc^2 three > > decades before they started. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > dwindling resources. Within 30 years there will be US troops in a > radioactive Iran. Hydrogen is not the most abundant thing in the universe, stupidity is. It is clear that, like Bush, most people are ignorant of the consequences of instigating Iraq or Russia into a war. It amazes me to see people in the media, in government, in the military, and idiots posting on the net, smugly talking about Invading Iran, and having American troops waging war with people all over the world. The fact of the matter is, if America attacked either Iran or Russia, or if Iran or Russia seriously thought that America was going to invade either of those nations, they wouldn't sit still for a moment. They would take out the oil shipping infrastructure in the Persian Gulf, and America and Western Europe will begin a rapid decline back into the stone age. Also Russia would immediate shut off the natural gas to Western Europe, and Argentina would cease shipping oil to America. The reason Germany lost WWII, was because the Russian sabotaged their oil wells, and Germany couldn't get enough oil to support their military and factories. The Germans couldn't get to the Middle East oil, but made a effort in that direction to tie up Allied troops to prevent them from doing so. If the Persian Gulf oil shipping infrastructure were taken out, America would be in far worse shape than Germany was, because America's economy and military consumes far more energy, and the people America wants to wage war against are much farther away than Moscow was from Germany. There is about 59 days of import protection in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and a maximum of 4.4 million barrels per day can be withdrawn. Considering that America uses 20 million barrels per day, it does not take a system engineer to comprehend that if Iran and/or Russia destroys the oil shipping infrastructure in the Persian Gulf America, will come to a screeching halt. Perhaps one of these saber rattlers to explain to me how to maintain America, and wage a war that would be many times more costly in oil, material, limbs, and lives, than the Iraqi War. No gas to wage the war. No gas to rebuild the oil shipping infrastructure. No gas for cars, trucks and buses. No heating and cooling for your homes. No electricity for your computers. No gas to operate the farms, factories, and trucks. In fact, if Saddam had considered what would happen to him, his family and his country, he would have taken out the oil infrastructure in Iraq, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf. The ONLY rational options in today's world, are conservation and live and let live. It is INSANITY to even consider waging wars that consume large amounts of energy, or wars that will force the enemy to disrupt the supply of energy. About ten nations have the capability of taking out the World's energy supply, and make it impossible for a major war to be waged against them or anyone, and after seeing what happened to Saddam, there is no doubt that several of the nations would use the "Dooms Day Strategy", as they would have nothing to lose. They would be bombed, but not occupied. -- Tom Potter http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/ http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm > Hydrogen is not the most abundant thing in the universe, > stupidity is. Right; and if oil exports to Europe and America stopped, agribusiness there would stop, and there'd be global famine everywhere else. As for Europe and America, there's already an expansion in "organic" farming and gardening that could be ramped up quickly to provide enuf turnips to get everyone thru the winter while all the other regions you mention f.cking starved. Like so much of Africa is doing already. Yeah, I know the rhetoric is way overblown. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.