NationStates Jolt Archive

Anarchist Communities seems to think (either that or it is just taking the p*ss) that all our energy problems can be solved if only we would listen to some Internet quacks. Compared to that, the vision of hemp powering our civilisation looks sane.

"Internet quacks"?!?!?

Excuse me?

First of all, how or where the hell would "internet quacks" get this? I am willing to post a list of books on the topic of free-energy that will explain anything from it's beginings and roots to the actual working physics of it or from how free-energy inventors have been oppressed by greedy corporations who see inventors as threats (which they are) to their mega-buck profits instead of the global solution they are to how Japan (which has nothing to lose from ZPE and everything to gain) is funding ZPE projects while the US government continues to squander billions on 'hot fusion' while 'cold fusion' could take place on a tabletop for less time, effort, and money, BUT. But corporate lobbyists have Congress in thier pocket (at least in regards to anything that pertains to making a profit.)
Why would hot fusion be more profitable? Cold fusion, if invented, could be marketed rapidly, and make the company who perfected it very wealthy.

Exactly. Sort of, anyway. While it would be profitable to that one company, all the other energy companies/corporations would have a frickin heart-attack cause all thier infrastructure is now useless and the consumer no longer *needs* them. Since it is *very profitable* to that one company (they would have a monopoly, more or less) that would nessesitate *a lack of profit* on the part of other corporations/companies. This view does not take in what is best for HUMANITY, for the EARTH (what good is living and being wealthy if YOU CAN'T BREATHE THE AIR?!?!?); and that, Anthrus, is the point.

Anarchist Communities seems to think (either that or it is just taking the p*ss) that all our energy problems can be solved if only we would listen to some Internet quacks. Compared to that, the vision of hemp powering our civilisation looks sane.

"Internet quacks"?!?!?

Excuse me?

First of all, how or where the hell would "internet quacks" get this? I am willing to post a list of books on the topic of free-energy that will explain anything from it's beginings and roots to the actual working physics of it or from how free-energy inventors have been oppressed by greedy corporations who see inventors as threats (which they are) to their mega-buck profits instead of the global solution they are to how Japan (which has nothing to lose from ZPE and everything to gain) is funding ZPE projects while the US government continues to squander billions on 'hot fusion' while 'cold fusion' could take place on a tabletop for less time, effort, and money, BUT. But corporate lobbyists have Congress in thier pocket (at least in regards to anything that pertains to making a profit.)
Why would hot fusion be more profitable? Cold fusion, if invented, could be marketed rapidly, and make the company who perfected it very wealthy.

Exactly. Sort of, anyway. While it would be profitable to that one company, all the other energy companies/corporations would have a frickin heart-attack cause all thier infrastructure is now useless and the consumer no longer *needs* them. Since it is *very profitable* to that one company (they would have a monopoly, more or less) that would nessesitate *a lack of profit* on the part of other corporations/companies. This view does not take in what is best for HUMANITY for the EARTH (what good is living and being wealthy if YOU CAN'T BREATHE THE AIR?!?!?), and that, Anthrus, is the point.
My point is that based on our free market, right now, a company somewhere is racing to find how to produce power from cold fusion. Is it illegal to research cold fusion in the US? If it isn't, some company is racing toward researching it right now.

My point is that based on our free market, right now, a company somewhere is racing to find how to produce power from cold fusion. Is it illegal to research cold fusion in the US? If it isn't, some company is racing toward researching it right now.

If some compnay is/would be racing towards researching cold-fusion, then some compan(ies)y is/would be racing towards producing ZPE extractors/generators. BUT.

As I've said before, any time someone (an inventor) or something (alternative/free-energy sources) threatens power/oil corporations control and authority over the consumer (forcing him/her to be part of an unsightly, polluting, wasteful power 'grid') or their profit margin (the two are nearly one and the same), they go out of thier way to do any or all of the below:

1) Hire lawyers to sue the inventor(s) for being 'fraudulent' (the theory is that since energy cannot be created or destroyed, ZPE (which 'draws something from nothing'*) is a load of bull (or so they say...)

2) Buy out the inventor and his/her patent rights or inventions

3) Physically harm the inventor or his/her family and/or friends

4) Physically destroy or damage the inventor's invention(s) and/or lab and/or notes and papers.

My point is that based on our free market, right now, a company somewhere is racing to find how to produce power from cold fusion. Is it illegal to research cold fusion in the US? If it isn't, some company is racing toward researching it right now.

If some compnay is/would be racing towards researching cold-fusion, then some compan(ies)y is/would be racing towards producing ZPE extractors/generators. BUT.

As I've said before, any time someone (an inventor) or something (alternative/free-energy sources) threatens power/oil corporations control and authority over the consumer (forcing him/her to be part of an unsightly, polluting, wasteful power 'grid') or their profit margin (the two are nearly one and the same), they go out of thier way to do any or all of the below:

1) Hire lawyers to sue the inventor(s) for being 'fraudulent' (the theory is that since energy cannot be created or destroyed, ZPE (which 'draws something from nothing'*) is a load of bull (or so they say...)

2) Buy out the inventor and his/her patent rights or inventions

3) Physically harm the inventor or his/her family and/or friends

4) Physically destroy or damage the inventor's invention(s) and/or lab and/or notes and papers.
You are reading too many conspiracy theories.

My point is that based on our free market, right now, a company somewhere is racing to find how to produce power from cold fusion. Is it illegal to research cold fusion in the US? If it isn't, some company is racing toward researching it right now.

If some compnay is/would be racing towards researching cold-fusion, then some compan(ies)y is/would be racing towards producing ZPE extractors/generators. BUT.

As I've said before, any time someone (an inventor) or something (alternative/free-energy sources) threatens power/oil corporations control and authority over the consumer (forcing him/her to be part of an unsightly, polluting, wasteful power 'grid') or their profit margin (the two are nearly one and the same), they go out of thier way to do any or all of the below:

1) Hire lawyers to sue the inventor(s) for being 'fraudulent' (the theory is that since energy cannot be created or destroyed, ZPE (which 'draws something from nothing'*) is a load of bull (or so they say...)

2) Buy out the inventor and his/her patent rights or inventions

3) Physically harm the inventor or his/her family and/or friends

4) Physically destroy or damage the inventor's invention(s) and/or lab and/or notes and papers.
You are reading too many conspiracy theories.

US Cold Fusion Research (http://www.ncas.org/erab/)

TEXAS patents on Cold Fusion/Hot Fusion generation (http://www.altenergy.org/3/new_energy/cold_fusion/cold_fusion.html)

Although not yet brought to the level of development where it is understood well enough to be widely reproduced, excess heat has apparently been produced and independently verified. One technology has already been granted a patent for a cold fusion process. This US patent is owned by the CETI Corporation in Texas (4). The CETI Corporation and many other researchers in the field of cold fusion research will be the subjects of this section of the website.

oh and the U.S. Navy Support for Cold Fusion.

USN COLD FUSION (http://www.unusualresearch.com/ColdFuseNavy/coldfusenavy.htm)

You havnt been reading enough.

There are absolutley no companies "Racing" towards cold fusion or ZPE.
there are Underground researches Experimenting with it.

But not established companies.

CETI Corporation all ready has a patent for a Cold Fusion process.

Really wow. I didnt know Cold fusion worked

Really wow. I didnt know Cold fusion worked

It currently cannot be mass marketed in large quanties. I'd say 5-10 years before that happens. But, when it does we can scrap Nuclear Plants.

And that is a good thing in my mind.

oh and the U.S. Navy Support for Cold Fusion.

USN COLD FUSION (http://www.unusualresearch.com/ColdFuseNavy/coldfusenavy.htm)
So the navy supports it. Well, I guess their isn't much anyone can do about the reaserch now. I'm betting hydrogen will still be dominant. But if the Navy does develope cold fusion, then it can sell the secrets to any company, and make them extremely rich.

*nod* I'll settle for tabletop cold fusion now (5-10 years from now, anyway), but ZPE is still the best future solution. There are no moving parts in some extractors/generators (the ones that do use magnets and are a bit more complicated) and the entire process (from turning ZPE into usuable electricity) requires no chemicals or ores to be mined, produced, refined, or extracted.

*nod* I'll settle for tabletop cold fusion now (5-10 years from now, anyway), but ZPE is still the best future solution. There are no moving parts in some extractors/generators (the ones that do use magnets and are a bit more complicated) and the entire process (from turning ZPE into usuable electricity) requires no chemicals or ores to be mined, produced, refined, or extracted.
First off, what does ZPE stand for? Now, if what you are saying is true, this is why cold fusion is under wraps. However, GM is publically attempting to build hydrogen fuel cells, and its labs are studying its infrastructure required. What are the prospects for that? BTW, NEC is expected to make a hydrogen fuel cell laptop in 2005 that'll run for 41 hours.

Zero
Point
Energy

So called because, even at 'zero-point' (the temperature at which NO molecular + movement is possible. Period. Or so we thought.) the energy still exists, floating in and out of existance in pairs, every billionth of a second...

Conversion to a hydrogen economy wouldn't be that difficult, as I've said before, the oil industry's basic infrastructure would support it, and there are at least three books I've read that support it (and all three of them have numerous sources cited).

Zero
Point
Energy

So called because, even at 'zero-point' (the temperature at which NO molecular + movement is possible. Period. Or so we thought.) the energy still exists, floating in and out of existance in pairs, every billionth of a second...

Correct. If there were no energy. Then "String Theory" would have no believers in the physics community.

STRING THEORY (http://superstringtheory.com/)

Wow silly string theory has its own website now?

--Deleted---Double entry due to slow server.

Wow silly string theory has its own website now?

Trying to be funny or is that what you think of the string theory of energy?

I found this in the Presidents State of the Union. It's ignored by the press, but fought by environmentalists. Not sure why? Seeing as his requests may have helped out Southern Cal with the recent fires. But it's the hydrogen power $$$ I thought of as significant to this thread.

Our third goal is to promote energy independence for our country, while dramatically improving the environment. (Applause.) I have sent you a comprehensive energy plan to promote energy efficiency and conservation, to develop cleaner technology, and to produce more energy at home. (Applause.) I have sent you Clear Skies legislation that mandates a 70-percent cut in air pollution from power plants over the next 15 years. (Applause.) I have sent you a Healthy Forests Initiative, to help prevent the catastrophic fires that devastate communities, kill wildlife, and burn away millions of acres of treasured forest. (Applause.)

I urge you to pass these measures, for the good of both our environment and our economy. (Applause.) Even more, I ask you to take a crucial step and protect our environment in ways that generations before us could not have imagined.

In this century, the greatest environmental progress will come about not through endless lawsuits or command-and-control regulations, but through technology and innovation. Tonight I'm proposing $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles. (Applause.)

A single chemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen generates energy, which can be used to power a car -- producing only water, not exhaust fumes. With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom, so that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free. (Applause.)

Join me in this important innovation to make our air significantly cleaner, and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of energy. (Applause.)

Bush took away funding that would have provided for clearing brush out of the areas where the fires started.

TG, you're a good social scientist but a poor prognosticator!
Here, on page 14, I call to witness your statement from page one:

Knowing the capacity of the human mind for avoiding new and unwelcome issues, I doubt this thread will generate much of a response... :D

Bush took away funding that would have provided for clearing brush out of the areas where the fires started.

TG, you're a good social scientist but a poor prognosticator!
Here, on page 14, I call to witness your statement from page one:

Knowing the capacity of the human mind for avoiding new and unwelcome issues, I doubt this thread will generate much of a response... :D

DOMENICI (http://domenici.senate.gov/newscenter/record.cfm?id=206509)

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Senator Pete Domenici, as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, today voted to approve the Bush administration's request for nearly $300 million in emergency funding to fortify federal fire fighting funds this year.

The committee today approved a $2 billion emergency supplemental plan, which includes $289 million requested by the White House for Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service for forest firefighting expenses. The supplemental funding, included within the FY2004 Legislative Affairs Appropriations Bill, is now cleared for consideration by the full Senate.

"This funding will allow the BLM and Forest Service to carry on with their work to battle another bad fire season in the West. I fully expect that a good portion of this money will be directed to New Mexico where wildfires have already charred thousands and thousands of acres," Domenici said.

Domenici indicated that the funding was added to the Legislative Affairs bill because it is deemed to be on a relatively quick legislative track through the Senate and House, and could be enacted soon.

"Last fall, we warned that the outlook for the 2003 fire season looked like it be worse the last summer," Domenici said. "We've already seen problems in the Gila, around Taos and in the Ruidoso area. And the bosque fire in Albuquerque was a real scare for the city. We must be vigilant against wildfires. The emergency supplemental funding we've approved should ensure that federal agencies have the resources needed to battle hot spots this summer."

Domenici, as a member of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, earlier Wednesday supported subcommittee approval of $2.2 billion for the National Fire Plan in FY2004. This funding level would provide $698.7 million for the BLM and $1.54 billion for the Forest Service.

This FY2004 Interior Appropriations Committee recommendation includes $111.3 million for the BLM and $160 million for the Forest Service to continue Domenici's "Happy Forests" initiative to continue hazardous fuels reduction work on Forest Service lands. In 2000, Domenici wrote the law that created the Forest Hazardous Fuels Reduction, or "Happy Forests," Initiative.

Also as part of the supplemental package, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved another $1.55 billion for the Department of Homeland Security for FEMA's disaster relief fund to respond to natural disasters.

Domenici a democrat helped get this package together.

The federal government gave $30 million to Grey Davis. What did he do with it?

Here's some of FEMAs funding + assistiance to California.
FEMA (http://www.fema.gov/news/event.fema?id=2543)
2002 funding (http://www.csac.counties.org/legislation/anti-terrorism/citizen_corps.pdf)
In October 2002 they got $100 million in all-hazards emergency operations funding.

FEMA Funds to Reche Canyon and Riverside (http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=6638)

FEMA Funds for San Bernadino (http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=6789)

All of the funding
Who Gets Fire money (http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=6890)

FEMA has approved Fire Management Assistance Grants for the seven major fires summarized below:

Fire County Date of Grant
Pass Riverside County Tuesday, October 21
Grand Prix San Bernardino Thursday, October 23
Verdale Los Angeles
and Ventura Saturday, October 25
Old San Bernardino Saturday, October 25
Paradise San Diego Sunday, October 26
Cedar San Diego Sunday, October 26
Simi Ventura Sunday, October 26


Federal Fire Management Assistance Grants are provided through the President's Disaster Relief Fund and made available to affected states by FEMA to assist in fighting fires that threaten to cause a major disaster. The assistance pays up to 75 percent of a state's eligible firefighting and emergency response costs for managing, mitigating and controlling designated fires. Eligible state firefighting costs can include expenses for field camps; equipment use, repair and replacement; tools, materials and supplies; and mobilization and demobilization activities

Here is the real kicker reported 10 September in the Sacramento Bee.

FIRE FUNDS TRANSFER (http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/california/story/7387433p-8330996c.html)

Don't go all Conspiracy Nutty. Bush moved Northern California Fire money to Southern California areas. $4.5 million dollars worth.

In a little-noticed aspect of its "Healthy Forests" initiative, the Bush administration has been transferring funds for fire prevention from Northern California forests to Southern California, largely to protect resort communities such as Lake Arrowhead and Idyllwild.
So far this year, the U.S. Forest Service has shifted about $4.5 million to Southern California from 11 Northern California national forests, according to agency figures provided to The Bee.

Talk about Precognition.

Then the Democrat obstruction begins.

Even so, the transfers are coming under fire from U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who helped secure some of the Northern California funds, and environmental groups who say the administration is playing a shell game.

If Feinstein had her way, the money would have stayed were it was. And not been available to help SoCal and the San Bernadino forests.

As I've said before, any time someone (an inventor) or something (alternative/free-energy sources) threatens power/oil corporations control and authority over the consumer (forcing him/her to be part of an unsightly, polluting, wasteful power 'grid') or their profit margin (the two are nearly one and the same), they go out of thier way to do any or all of the below:

3) Physically harm the inventor or his/her family and/or friends

4) Physically destroy or damage the inventor's invention(s) and/or lab and/or notes and papers.
You are reading too many conspiracy theories.
Not at all, I have often been called upon to stalk the families of ZPE proponents, smashing the lights and windscreens of their cars, making silent phone calls, that sort of thing . . . :roll:

This post contains sarcasm.

I've always called it silly string theory, but that doesnt mean I dont think its true.

Anyway, When was that speech dated. Surely you know its important to watch what a politician does, not what they say.

And it sorta annoys me that you rip on environmentalists with the fires. Because i consdier myself an environmentalist and Im not opposed to Back burning. Its jsut a generalisation, and they arent helpful. Except to a politician in his Rhetoric.

Bush took away funding that would have provided for clearing brush out of the areas where the fires started.

TG, you're a good social scientist but a poor prognosticator!
Here, on page 14, I call to witness your statement from page one:

Knowing the capacity of the human mind for avoiding new and unwelcome issues, I doubt this thread will generate much of a response... :D

Heh, If it hadnt been for my Repeated and Unashamed Bumping this thread would have died on Page two. :D

"I have sent you Clear Skies legislation that mandates a 70-percent cut in air pollution from power plants over the next 15 years."

Wow! This from the governor of Texas, who pushed for legislation that laxed environmental controls on Texas industry and ended up with at least two things: 1. [All hail] More Profits [!]; and: 2. in damn near every school throughout Dallas and Fort Worth (the two are right on top of each other), smog detectors were installed to determine when the children could out for recess safely.

"I have sent you a Healthy Forests Initiative, to help prevent the catastrophic fires that devastate communities, kill wildlife, and burn away millions of acres of treasured forest."

This is "Healthy Forest [Industry] Initiative" is not one favored by many environmentalists because it seeks, for *more* than the most part, to allow more than just the "thinning of forest underbrush." It does not get to the heart of the problem, at all. It's better than nothing, but it could be a hellluva lot better.

"Tonight I'm proposing $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles"

It's about time, you greedy asshole. And yet. And yet this does not serve the *best* interest of America, or Americans, or the World, as a whole. It serves the interests of the oil industry (whose infrastructure, as I've said before, could easily be converted to a hydrogen economy). Power, control, and money is concentrated in their hands where and when it *could* be (if not for some of the oil and power industry establishment) something better, more rewarding, and *de-centralized*. Free and clean energy that allows sustainable living virtually anywhere, for anyone.

Oh, and, ah, that energy bill, *completly* changed in meaning and purpose by the Republican majority (from what the Democrats put into motion, before the Republicans took the majority) into a bunch of government handouts, subsidies, and tax breaks that the power industry sure as hell doesn't need.

But they wanted it, and in the end, isnt that all that really matters?

This deserves a bump

Not that im bumping this or anything....

http://www.tachyon-energy-products.com/main/zero_point_energy_fields.htm

Heres something that you may find interesting....well not really.

I dont

Oh, and, ah, that energy bill, *completly* changed in meaning and purpose by the Republican majority (from what the Democrats put into motion, before the Republicans took the majority) into a bunch of government handouts, subsidies, and tax breaks that the power industry sure as hell doesn't need.
You are a true believer that oil companies control everything. Oh well. But really, a hydrogen infrastructure can't pop up overnight. We have two big challenges.
The first is to start production of hydrogen. Once we do, it is cheap and easy to produce. But the production infrastructure ain't cheap. Congress has in its energy bill, however, a new breed a nuclear power plants. These second generation reactors are to be finished by 2015, the same time GM says it'll roll out its hydrogen cars.
Secondly, hydrogen molecules are small. This is a vexing problem, since they may be tiny enough to slip through piping and tanks. Of course, the Hindenburg was able to hold it all in.

Heh no it wasnt.

Oil companies dont exactly rule from on high. But what Anarch is saying is that oil makes the world go round. So if they wanted too, they could cut off the flow. So Governemnts wont exactly Antagonise them.

New Astrolia: Not exactly, but true enough.

Anthrus: No, I don't believe that "oil companies control everything" (used that statement as an example for a hyberbole on my English test).

1. Find out what the Gilded Age was, as well as who called it that and why.

2. Examine the generally held beliefs of the public and the government at the time.

3. Look at the relations (or lack thereof) between labor and management, and how those compare with #2

4. Nowadays, compare how corporations and people in favor of more "economic freedoms" (libertarian-right or authoritarian-right, generally speaking) are pushing for a return to something like, or in the same ballpark as those of the Gilded Age.

5. Ever heard of "The Golden Rule: He who has the gold rules." People who have the gold (money) get to make (or change) the rules.

Substitue "People" for 'Big Business' or 'Corporations', and you have the politics of the rich in the Gilded Age and the politics of Big Business today.

New Astrolia: Not exactly, but true enough.

Anthrus: No, I don't believe that "oil companies control everything" (used that statement as an example for a hyberbole on my English test).

1. Find out what the Gilded Age was, as well as who called it that and why.

2. Examine the generally held beliefs of the public and the government at the time.

3. Look at the relations (or lack thereof) between labor and management, and how those compare with #2

4. Nowadays, compare how corporations and people in favor of more "economic freedoms" (libertarian-right or authoritarian-right, generally speaking) are pushing for a return to something like, or in the same ballpark as those of the Gilded Age.

5. Ever heard of "The Golden Rule: He who has the gold rules." People who have the gold (money) get to make (or change) the rules.

Substitue "People" for 'Big Business' or 'Corporations', and you have the politics of the rich in the Gilded Age and the politics of Big Business today.
I know about the Gilded Age. I think it was Mark Twain who called it that. Types like Rockerfeller and Carnegie were in politics. And now you believe corporations today control everything. I notice a common thread here. In both the Gilded Age and today, we were able to look inwards. I think that the war we are in is the first war in US history where our attention can be focused inwards to our country.
My point is that it has to do with economics. The Gilded Age, Twenties, and fifties were dominated by business because we had no external threats, really. During all wars, including the Cold War, the government has been focusing on the military or foreign policy. During the Cold War, the government loved pursuing a socialist agenda.
Quite literally, it makes the government have something to do. Like it or not, corporations will play a role in our politics. But I feel it's a bit extreme for you to say that oil companies physically harm people.

http://graphics.theonion.com/pics_3631/christian_protestors.gif

...And now you believe corporations today control everything...I feel it's a bit extreme for you to say that oil companies physically harm people...

I never said the first part, and never implied it. I believe they are getting more power than they have in the past and than they legally should.

I never said the second part, altough, it's true (not in the way you or I am talking about - you think pollution never *physically* harmed people?). I earnestly believe that the military-industrial complex is something that should be locked in a cage and closely guarded (yes, I am aware of the irony in that statement, but it's in the same ballpark as "intolerance of intolerance"), and I have the Commander in Chief of the largest army - land, sea, and air - that the world has ever seen...

"...we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

-President General Dwight D. Eisenhower, in

his last public address as President

You are reading too many conspiracy theories.

Then so was Eisenhower, Anthrus, so was he.

http://graphics.theonion.com/pics_3631/christian_protestors.gif

"http://graphics.THEONION.com/pics_3631/christian_protestors.gif"

*ahem*

'nuff said.

...And now you believe corporations today control everything...I feel it's a bit extreme for you to say that oil companies physically harm people...

I never said the first part, and never implied it. I believe they are getting more power than they have in the past and than they legally should.

I never said the second part, altough, it's true (not in the way you or I am talking about - you think pollution never *physically* harmed people?). I earnestly believe that the military-industrial complex is something that should be locked in a cage and closely guarded (yes, I am aware of the irony in that statement, but it's in the same ballpark as "intolerance of intolerance"), and I have the Commander in Chief of the largest army - land, sea, and air - that the world has ever seen...

"...we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

-President General Dwight D. Eisenhower, in

his last public address as President

You are reading too many conspiracy theories.

Then so was Eisenhower, Anthrus, so was he.
About physical harm, you said that oil companies directly threaten others or their families. As for the military industrial complex, could it happen, of course. Is it now? I believe not. For one, their is hardly any mutual benefit. All oil the military uses is US oil, not foreign oil. And the suspicion doesn't exist in my mind, because I did believe in this war in Iraq, and that it was vital to the overall war. The economic side effects are rather great. But let's say the problem was in South Africa. Then we'd be accused of going after their gold.

http://graphics.theonion.com/pics_3631/christian_protestors.gif

"http://graphics.THEONION.com/pics_3631/christian_protestors.gif"

*ahem*

'nuff said.

Your deductive abilities astound me, sherlock. Have a cookie.

I don't really want to wiegh in on the general debate but to point out that currently the most viable and worked on method of 'charging' fuel cells is using petroleum. And the administration favored that over other new methods. huh.

About physical harm, you said that oil companies directly threaten others or their families. As for the military industrial complex, could it happen, of course. Is it now? I believe not. For one, their is hardly any mutual benefit. All oil the military uses is US oil, not foreign oil. And the suspicion doesn't exist in my mind, because I did believe in this war in Iraq, and that it was vital to the overall war. The economic side effects are rather great. But let's say the problem was in South Africa. Then we'd be accused of going after their gold.

Eh perhaps, But that doesnt Discredit the oil theory. Its not just that theres an aggressive war in iraq, and there is also convieninently oil therefore War=oil....Bush and most of his Admnistration Have strong links to oil companis currently. They have much to gain.

BAM!! (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3236294.stm)

Another step towards the building of a commercial Fusion reactor.

I wish they were building it where i lived so i could get a job on the site or something like that.

Umm, that link is about tapeworms . . . ? :?

Doesnt that article just make you Feel sick?

Anyway Here it is Clicky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3239806.stm)

This has been a great thread, the debate really has exceeded my expectations. I did not think anyone would care, but look at all those posts and poll responses. And this from the General Forum. Thanks guys. But now that pretty much everything has been said, it is time to archive it, lest a forum purge get to it in my absence.