T&L Publications

Chris, I realize that it is so terribly difficult for you to admit a mistake, but it is obvious that I was referring to the thread. Not to the first post of page one. Twist it, spin it, fold, spindle and mutilate it. But it is too too late to change it. Your ego will recover.<p>As a science all day every day kind of person, I would've thought your perceptive skills were more keen, your conclusions were more rational, and, perhaps most of all, your intellectual integrity was more firm.<p>I don't have a problem with not responding to those messages of yours that are not unquestionably directed at something I wrote. If you can be so kind as to return the favor, I think we can be friends.<p>[ July 15, 2005: Message edited by: sofaspud ]</p>

Sofa <p>...don’t get your “knickers in a knot”? <p>I laugh from afar when so many other are serious when serious is passe, and "not serious" when it is of vital importance to this nation. <p>My suggestion of Solar was met with voodoo, ignorance, and YOUTH, while others see in the Tea Leaves the body of the holy grail. <p>Who cant laugh at this amount of ignorance to the tenth power? <p>Don’t every try to “PEG ME” unless a smile is on your face at all times, I grew up down under where stirring up the Shit was a national past time, hence the wooden spoon award. <p>However, don’t ever mistake my words, they are all scientific, all the time, unless otherwise stated. <p>I get joy from those who will tell you it cant be done, where as it was already done, decades before, and usually by my self or others.<p> Joy is a little perverse a description, I call it Bait, and who cant laugh at a fool who says it cant be done, even though its ancient history? <p>Where else does one get their laughs, if not from the fools?<p>And PS,...... no bad feelings were ever directed at you, the thread was a joke from the beginning, and it was always a hot bed of contention. It was also a Great Segway back into solar, where all of the pseudo scientists had their opinions that change by the nano second, as gas prices rise by the femto second!<p>[ July 15, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

I'm probably insane for clicking the "Post Reply" button, though maybe I can brush it off by declaring that "it's just more fun that way." And now I'm just going to run through your post, with a result which may well serve to further the diagnoses.
What is deemed serious or not serious, or of vital national importance, varies widely from person to person. Reasonable persons are capable of arriving at some form of agreement, but claims of "voodoo, ignorance, and YOUTH" aren't likely to win over very many. No respectable scientist would offer up a hypothesis to his peers, and proceed to label all doubters as ignorant phonies. Persuasive evidence will convince the "slow ones."
Laughing at ignorance? Sure, it happens often to one degree or another. In a different context it can also be a serious matter. But getting to my point, your sentence has an elitist stench. To me it is an attitude more in line with a quack or a dictator rather than a scientist or humanitarian.
You peg yourself. Don't shift the blame to me. I also understand that you were raised in Australia. I suppose that was some sort of display of national pride. I would be a native Texan were it not for our Air Force family being stationed in Montana. All well and good, but not actually of any vital importance. The character of a man is vastly more important to me than what flag he flies.
Your words are all scientific, all the time, unless otherwise stated? A logical conclusion of that is that science doesn't possess all the answers and therefore neither do you. To believe otherwise leads one back to the adjective form of ignore.
There will always be naysayers and Luddites. They actually don't impede progress in the long run. Personally I don't give them much thought. I have to admit, though, that I haven't a clue what you may have done "decades before" that is now unjustly neglected. Maybe I'd remember if you hadn't blown the Nobel cash. (just finding humor, not digging for malicious sarcasm. see below.)
I find it somewhat interesting that you notice a description as being perverse, but not the activity being described. But that aside, I've little doubt that there is knowledge lost to history which may or may not be rediscovered. Honestly, though, I think we are at such a position here in the 21st century that those things which are worthy are few and far between. Steel is much more useful today than stone and bronze.
I find humor in many places, and I'll not exclude the foolish. But I can paraphrase a quote that says, "The difference between a fool and a wise man is that the fool cannot learn from the wise man, but the wise man can learn from the fool."
No hard feelings here either. But I like to stand by my words so I don't take well to having them "morphed." My thought when I posted the gas/topic message was that the thread actually seemed closer to sociology than the physics of energy. You seem to agree, though I may be misunderstanding you on that. Traditional and alternative energy is not my forte so I tend to observe mostly. When theory, the scientific method, and practical application combine to unveil a substitute for fossil fuel I will be ready. But I don't chase rainbows, document imaginary conspiracies, or rotate the stock in an underground bunker. I have confidence in mankind, and many thousand of years history for support. It isn't always pretty, but it always ends up further ahead.

to Jolly Roger ---
Is that cost per gal (of ethanol) still true with the rising cost of Oil? Does this process exist in a non-oil environment - or is it (oil) used as a heat source or catalyst?<p>What we forget is the widespread USE of oil-based products... it is the source of most chlorine (your water may cost more soon, too!)<p>Yet more products to consider altermates for!<p>(Gas in NJ is $2.25:regular- $2.45: premium ... more if you choose to buy without shopping... as much as $2.60:regular if you want to prove you're rich!)<p>[ July 17, 2005: Message edited by: peter-f ]</p>

Sofa....<p>When you get to be my age or wisdom level you too can laugh at the youth. <p>I have laughed at students all my life because only the “student of youth” seems to know the world better than any one else with out having left their county or even condominium? <p>Been there, done that, and Im still laughing all the way back to the 80s.<p> Elitist, no, Just travel a lot and learn even more and then chuckle at the youth like a grandpa or old fart like me. <p>As you get older, life is funnier and it gets better! <p> Just look at the fools voting for bigger fools who run this country.<p> And they don’t suspect a thing? Bahahah<p>You need to separate the morons from your peers and recognize the Student or wanna bee from the fakes.<p> Its not hard? <p>First of all,... any one who says with a straight face, “Why did we need to go to the moon” ...is a moron.

This person is not my peer, nor would I want them to EVER be. <p>I have chastised these people over the years even in prestigious magazines and not one of them has a come back line because being chastised for them is a education. They turn cogs, in the scientific world, but don’t know why? <p>Another form of moron says, “Solar Cells are just too expensive to be a viable alternative to todays energy”.<p> This person has no insight into the real world and doesn’t include shifting factors of the every day world because that requires thinking, and keeping up with the NEWS. Almost as bad as chewing bubble gum and walking? <p> Again,..... don’t stand behind ME, your no peer of mine. Your mind is closed tighter than a clam. <p>MY peers say in simple English...”it can be done with hard work, and good science”, and leave the voodoo to housewives, students, and pseudo scientists.<p>And PS, my “flag” is of the world.<p> I will back the Borneo tribesman long before McDonald’s, or Haliburton. <p>I was born in the US, and have told our useless government more than once, where they can stick it, with out my tax dollars.<p>[ July 17, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

At the beginning God passed out only a few brains to some individuals--to all the rest, he gave confidence!

I do know that good science involves demonstrable repeatability.
Of results, not words.

nor last words which, as we shall see, tends to be the high order bit for some...

Academic experts have voiced much and had much influence in the science of H2. All having strong answers but few offer a solution. The fashion and presentation of what is really known about H2 is either incomplete or clouded by someone's conception.<p>Possibly one misconception that impurity clogs an electrolizer membrane is bad. In a single process the flow is hindered. Possibly there are more steps that recycles the impurity. If you assume this is true then what is the next step in the process?

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by peter-f:
to Jolly Roger ---
Is that cost per gal (of ethanol) still true with the rising cost of Oil? Does this process exist in a non-oil environment - or is it (oil) used as a heat source or catalyst?<p><hr></blockquote><p>The cost of E85, the 85% ethanol, 15% gasoline is just slightly lower than pure gasoline or gasoline with 10% ethanol. Here is a link:<p>http://www.cleanairchoice.org/outdoor/PriceForum.asp<p>
The process for making ethanol can be found here:<p>http://www.ethanol.org/howethanol.html<p>I don't know the cost for heating the mash to liquify and ferment. But I'd assume that more ethanol is produced than an equivalent in heat is lost or the process would not be worth it.

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jolly Roger:

I don't know the cost for heating the mash to liquify and ferment. But I'd assume that more ethanol is produced than an equivalent in heat is lost or the process would not be worth it.<hr></blockquote><p>Problem is... many processes are advocated despite not being 'worth it' (often without being aware of such non-economy)... some rely on subsidies to 'make' them worth it. <p>example: The 'cost' of oil makes the Athebasca tar sands a near-worthless asset- to extract oil, you need oil. The more oil costs, the higher the yield needs to be to become attractive. I owned a small share of its once-upon-a-time Canadian oil-company-owner, and tehn it was to be profitable at $40/bbl... recently they said $60... next guess, anyone?<p>I'm in favor of conservation and exploring alternatives... just we need some truly Good ones!

History only repeats it self for the fool who thinks he is different. <p>Much like DC these days. <p>The wise quit while they have won and are ahead. <p> Pure ignorance, youth and impetuous behavior keeps digging at the scab of success despite the fact that the wheel is still just made up from one piece, while they insist three pieces are needed?<p>They are special, and should become politicians because they can bring us more useless concepts that help no one except them selves. Isnt that what we have become?<p>[ July 19, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

What we've become is members of a long-winded, self-serving soapbox diversion from the thread topic.

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by philba:
nor last words which, as we shall see, tends to be the high order bit for some...<hr></blockquote><p>heh heh heh, look up a couple of posts. zero content but an attempt at "last words". I shudder to think of what would happen if we had two of them...

Someone here is going to have to be the better man and simply walk away from this thread. Who will it be?<p>Interestingly, Today's (July 20th) reading from Proverbs says:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Proverbs 20:3
Avoiding a fight is a mark of honor; only fools insist on quarreling.<hr></blockquote><p>Walking away doesn't mean you're wrong; It just means you acknowledge that further discussion will not reinforce your point-of-view in the minds of others.