Global Warming - yes, no, maybe?

[DanKroh 11]

"Since you think that most of the energy R&D money is from big oil, you are going to the wrong talks. That is why you have been mislead about the risks of radiation. Most energy R&D (unless including oil money looking for new oil fields) is from the federal government."

 

Actually, I said big oil *controls* the R&D money, not that it comes from them. However, my understanding is that a lot of the folks in the government who give out that R&D money are in the pocket of big oil, or at least greatly beholden to them, according to friends who are trying to do research in the alternative energy field.

 

And I'm not sure I quite understand what that has to do about my understanding about the risks of radiation. That, again, comes from people I know who work in that field.

[skeptic 993]

"Are there really many people today who actually believe that dinosaurs and people existed at the same time?"

 

Pack, where you been? Just ask Fred and Wilma. Of course, we also have Barney in his regal hue. [:0}

[GaHillBilly 10]

"Are there really many people today who actually believe that dinosaurs and people existed at the same time?"

 

Sure . . . just like there are people who believe in a 'confluence of spiritual power in Sedona' or in re-incarnation or that Al Gore is an honest man!

 

But, I gather that there may actually be some ambiguous fossil evidence that could be interpreted to support the man + dinosaur conclusion.

 

You also have to keep in mind that most mainstream journalists LITERALLY have no idea what's wrong with the statement, "due to acid rain, the stream's pH had risen to 8.6". So, when they react with horror to Palin's supposed man+dinosaur statements . . . it's only because someone has clued them into how they are SUPPOSED to respond. On their own account, it's very unlikely that they remember (or ever understood) the succession of extinctions that are essential elements of the current "evolution story".

 

 

GaHillBilly

 

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

GHB, I actually had to google "confluence of spiritual power in Sedona" just in case I had missed something. Gad! There was even a photo...of Fred with Betty - and Dino! (he must have told Wilma he was out hiking on the AT)

Thanks Skeptic, a good laugh is always welcome.

[GernBlansten 10]

Pack, not only are there people who believe man walked with dinosaurs, they even built a museum.

 

http://creationmuseum.org/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Creation_Museum_10.png

 

"The state-of-the-art 70,000 square foot museum brings the pages of the Bible to life, casting its characters and animals in dynamic form and placing them in familiar settings. Adam and Eve live in the Garden of Eden. Children play and dinosaurs roam near Edens Rivers. The serpent coils cunningly in the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Majestic murals, great masterpieces brimming with pulsating colors and details, provide a backdrop for many of the settings."

[le Voyageur 72]

...granted that chemical contaminants and similar things are widespread but I think you are overstating the effects. Fact is, this is the Faustian bargain that we've made. We have a technological needle in our vein and we wouldn't remove it even if we could. packsaddle

 

History tells of those who put that "technological needle" in their viens. The Hurons, Mohawks, Iroquoi,Potawatomi, Leni Lanape, Anishinabe, Menominees, Oneida, Chowans, Weapemeocs, Secotans, etc...they are now either no more, or just shadows...we need to think twice about what we are trading away for those brass pots, and pretty beads...(This message has been edited by Le Voyageur)

[packsaddle 753]

Gern, you're right, what was I thinking? I am reminded of the state legislator on a committee providing oversight for the quality of science education who said, "The Bible is the only textbook we need."

If only he and like-minded people would reject all medical technologies not mentioned in the Bible....but there's that 'selective pressure' thing again - absent from the population for the time being.

 

Back to an old comment on textbooks: I think the biology text by Miller and Levine is fair and objective. I'd be interested in hearing evidence to the contrary. I mention this one because Miller was one of the primary witnesses at the Dover trial in which the creationist liars were pretty much destroyed by the evidence and a ruling by a Bush-appointed conservative judge.

 

le Voyageur, the deed is done. Sorry. Might as well enjoy the show.

[le Voyageur 72]

... the deed is done. Sorry. Might as well enjoy the show. packsaddle.

 

yep, Cassandra exits as the lights fade, with Medea waiting to take her place on the stage.

[GaHillBilly 10]

Miller/Urey, not Miller & Levine. The ref was to an experiment described in textbook(s) not a particular textbook.

 

Here's a Wiki: [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment ]

 

The article seems be generally accurate, but have been largely written by a fan-boy who minimized current problems. Elsewhere, in the same texts that contain Miller/Urey you can usually find info on early atmosphere conditions, and they aren't the Miller/Urey conditions.

 

 

GaHillBilly

 

 

PS: Sneering at 'idiots' not present in the discussion doesn't really further the discussion.

 

I could sneer all day long at SMs and ASMs who can't box a compass, orient a map, start a fire without a "fire starter", distinguish a pileated from a red-headed woodpecker, quickly tie a correct bowline or chop wood without burying the axe in the ground. And, I'd take 10:1 some of THOSE folks ARE in this discussion. (In fact, all the Scout leaders I've encountered would fail at least one of those rather basic outdoor skill tests.)

 

But what purpose does it serve?

[skeptic 993]

GHB; I certainly would not consistently pass all of your noted tasks, especially the birds. And, fire starting without matches is a hit or miss thing for me at best; though the requirement has never been to do so anyway. If I have to box the compass beyond sixteen, I might misname something; and after 32, I likely would simply botch it up pretty well. Now, if you just want it put back in its container, I can do that well, I think.

[Eagle92 110]

What's wrong with using a hot spark fire starter? grant you it's not best to let a CS use one (found out the hardway, DON"T ASK ).

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

GaHillBilly writes:

The [Miller/Urey wiki] article seems be generally accurate, but have been largely written by a fan-boy who minimized current problems.

 

Which fan-boy? Just looking at the history, It has over 500 edits by lots of different people.

[le Voyageur 72]

GHB; I certainly would not consistently pass all of your noted tasks, especially the birds. And, fire starting without matches is a hit or miss thing for me at best; though the requirement has never been to do so anyway. If I have to box the compass beyond sixteen, I might misname something; and after 32, I likely would simply botch it up pretty well. Now, if you just want it put back in its container, I can do that well, I think. Skeptic

 

Not to worry, I've seen plenty of Eagles who couldn't do the basics such as hunt, track, stalk, skin, butcher, make leather, smoke meat, plant a garden, can, sew, cook, raise meat animals, chop/split wood, work a forge, harness or shoe a horse, fell trees, lay out a plat, make molasses, buck hay, or communicate in Morse Code...

[GaHillBilly 10]

"Not to worry, I've seen plenty of Eagles who couldn't do the basics such as hunt, track, stalk, skin, butcher, make leather, smoke meat, plant a garden, can, sew, cook, raise meat animals, chop/split wood, work a forge, harness or shoe a horse, fell trees, lay out a plat, make molasses, buck hay, or communicate in Morse Code... "

 

Wow, Voyageur, after all your talk about Indians, I would have thought you and those around you had real skillz. I guess you are a fan of 'virtual Indians'? Does that mean that all your facts about Indians are just 'virtual facts', too?

 

 

 

Merlyn, I judged by tone and content, not # of edits. So, it was an assumption on my part, one which might be incorrect. However, there are two articles in Wiki that I mostly authored. There have been MANY minor edits since I wrote them a couple of years ago, but they are substantially unchanged (or were, when I last checked them several months ago).

 

 

 

GaHillBilly

[vol_scouter 365]

Dan,

 

My research is in radiobiology among other areas. The risks that you mention are blown out of proportion. You make a good point about spent fuel versus waste. If we would copy France, Japan, and other forward thinking countries, we would have a limited number of breeder reactors. The breeders would produce more nuclear fuel while taking waste products with very long half lives and transforming the waste into much shorter half lives. This means that the storage time is not nearly so long before the material has decayed to stable nuclear species. The waste problems have been solved with Yucca mountain though Obama just closed it before it was ever used despite the nuclear industry being heavily taxed for years by the government to construct Yucca mountain. Any control over R&D dollars spent by the government comes from the politicians. From the government estimates on the 'alternative' energy production, I would argue that far too much is being spent in areas that have no real promise for significant energy production. A family member in a technical field related to this discussion read a report discussing the energy required to construct a large off shore windmill. The total energy generated in the expected lifetime of the windmill is approximately equal to the energy required to fabricate and construct the windmill. If we do not wish to cut our electrical energy consumption by ~80%, we MUST turn to nuclear power or burn more fossil fuels. To cut 80% of our energy consumption means being much hotter/colder, no TV, little lighting, etc. Another way to think about an 80% electrical energy cut, you can only have power coming to your home for 4.8 hours a day.