Re: a meteorologist speaks on climate change
Nick, I see an important point in the text you quoted that I think you missed. So, my conclusion is, we should not shoot ourselves in the economic foot to gain reductions equivalent to only, say, 10% in emissions. We may be too late, or we may be close to too late. In either of those scenerios a 10% reduction will not save us, but merely cripple the global economies, and put the massive absolute solutions out of reach. We can't save civilization by dismantling it. This is what must happen: 1. The economy must be kept roaring. 2. This will free up resources that can be directed toward non CO2 producing energy solutions like various forms of cold fusion. 3. Leaders must direct appropriate research to be done with these resources. (this is what is still not happening) 4. Then, when practical solutions are identified, we will have sufficient wealth and prosperity to impliment them. This is the only way. Anything less than this brings us to global failure. Can it be done in time? I don't know, and neither does anybody else. If greenhouse gases are a problem that humans must fix, then this is the only way we can both fix it and save civilization. Jeff Fink P.S. This Kyoto stuff is a formula for disaster. We are past the point of no return on a takeoff runway. It is too late to apply the brakes and make a safe stop. It's throttle to the firewall. We either fly or die. - Original Message - From: Nick Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:10 AM Subject: Re: a meteorologist speaks on climate change Thomas Malloy wrote to the lone wolf meteorologist Roy Spencer and was directed by the reply to his website of serious articles http://www.tcsdaily.com/Authors.aspx?id=267 Mr Spencer further poured scorn on the piece of popular journalism at http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0222-27.htm by saying I would say that is the most irresponsible piece of journalism I have ever read on climate issues -- --- I say Mr Spencer himself is irresponsible and an (even more than an) idiot. From his serious articles it is all to easy to see that he is not stupid - he is far more dangerous than that - he is what I call anti-intelligent. Just like an anti-matter particle can seriously interfere with the life of a normal matter particle, so then do anti-intelligent people royally screw things up. Ordinary people make the mistake of giving equal weight to two opposing scientific views. They assume that the underlying values and beliefs and assumptions of both can be taken as read to be cool, unbiased and responsible and wise. This is very often not the case!! An anti-intelligent person uses their undoubted brain power and education to come up with ideas and beliefs that are pathological - that tend to hurt humanity and the ecosphere. They often seem more rational , more calm and collected and more sensible. Watch out! This is the intelligent position. Greenhouse gases ARE increasing in the atmosphere, Physics STATES that this will change the retention of energy in our atmosphere unless there is some exactly equal balancing effect which is highly unlikely, has not been mentioned, and it should not be gambled upon that there is. There are many feedback loops that can be identified (dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions depending on how you define the categories) some positive, some negative. Depending on which combination of loops proves to have the upper hand, the Planet will retain more energy from the sun causing ultimately disastrous global warming or will stay exactly the same or we may end up with an ice planet. Warming will almost certainly modify the feedback loops themselves. Once we are in a period of unknown climate instability NO-ONE knows or can genuinely predict which way things will go. Let me shout that again. NOBODY KNOWS WHICH WAY THINGS WILL GO - NOBODY AT ALL - the basic laws of the universe say NO-ONE KNOWS FOR CERTAIN. Anybody who disputes these statements is not just an idiot, they are anti-intelligent. There are very many scientists and environmentalists who believe in their theories so strongly that they believe they can predict what will happen, but climate science is all deduction and inference. It is not now, and never has been, an experimental science, so the hypotheses have never been any thing like fully tested by any experiment (e.g - let's halve the concentration of CO2 at the Poles and treble it at the Equator and see if what happens agrees with our predictions from our hypotheses and our computer models) and when one is dealing with a primary life support mechanism for most life on Earth, it is highly irresponsible to accidentally experiment with (more like monkey with) it, as we are currently doing.
Re: a meteorologist speaks on climate change
Whether or not the global economy is good, it must become good to accomplish all that must be done. All of our CO2 producing machines must be replaced with non CO2 producing machines, and this can only be done by revving up our CO2 technology to the max to produce the replacements! We are running out of runway. Who's for cutting the throttle and hitting the brakes? Are we going to fly or end up splattered in a ditch? Jeff - Original Message - From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 1:23 PM Subject: Re: a meteorologist speaks on climate change On Mar 14, 2006, at 7:49 AM, Keith Nagel wrote: Revtek writes: This is what must happen: 1. The economy must be kept roaring. Dow index / Jan 2000 - 11,500 Jan 2006 - 10,780 aggregate US economic growth, -6% Roaring, Rev? How about whimpering like a pimpslapped bitch. Yes, and considering inflation, it is of course worse. A 1999 dollar was worth 876.79 in 2005. See: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi The market actually dropped from 11,500 to roughly 9452, all in 1999 dollars, a real loss of about 18 percent. The cost of energy is a real economy killer. A concentrated effort on renewable energy could do for the economy what WWII or the space program did for the economy, and more. The economic benefits would be permanent. Winning the war and getting to the moon had only spinoff economic benefits. Solving the energy problem has *direct* economic benefits. Most people aren't aware of the costs they will pay for bad government choices, nor the benefits that can be obtained from the right government choices. The problem is renewable energy upsets the status quo, so who is there to lobby for and publicise the right choices? Horace Heffner
Fw: (off topic)
Joseph L. Mendez Jr. Project Manager/ Estimator E.C. Bones Inc. Construction - In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking. (I sent it to everyone on my list. Will you?) Billy Graham's daughter was interviewed on the Early Show and Jane Clayson asked her "How could God let something like this Happen?" (regarding Katrina) Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful response. She said, "I believe God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are, but for years we've been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of our government and to get out of our lives. And being the gentleman He is, I believe He has calmly backed out. How can we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand He leave us alone?" In light of recent events...terrorists attack, school shootings, etc. I think it started when Madeleine Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body found recently) complained she didn't want prayer in our schools, and we said OK. Then someone said you better not read the Bible in school . the Bible says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as yourself. And we said OK. Then Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide). We said an expert should know what he's talking about. And we said OK. Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates, and themselves. Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW." Funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world's going to hell. Funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says Funny how you can send 'jokes' through e-mail and they spread like wildfire but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing. Funny how lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene articles pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and workplace. Are you laughing? Funny how when you forward this message, you will not send it to many on your address list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they WILL think of you for sending it. Funny how we can be more worried about what other people think of us than what God thinks of us. Pass it on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it... no one will know you did. But, if you discard this thought process, don't sit back and complain about what bad shape the world is in. "Good friends are like stars.You don't always see them, but you know they are always there
Re: Gaia Scientist: DO PANIC
Lake Ontario is 245 ft above sea level. No need to worry. Jeff - Original Message - From: Rhong Dhong [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 7:51 AM Subject: Re: Gaia Scientist: DO PANIC --- John Coviello [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Global Warming Has Arrived. Get used to it and sell any property that you own in flood prone areas. That reminds me of something I have wondered about. I live in a town on the South shore of Lake Ontario. If global warming results in a rise in sea-level, will the raging waters travel down the St. Lawrence Seaway, and raise the level of Lake Ontario and flood me out? Or is there a stopper somewhere along the way? __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Global Warming
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:53 PM Subject: Re: Global Warming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vortexians- The evening news on ABC ststed that the clock watchers are going to add a leap second to the last second of Dec.31,2005 to correct the clocks to the earths rotation. It seems that they have had to add 23 seconds since 1972 to correct clocks. The Earth has been slowing down its rotation speed. The slowing of the earth should increase its temperature I would think (Im possibly wrong.) It does seem to coinside with the years of biggest increase of temperature. Or as many suspect just a normal cycle. A cycle we are not aware of. _ges- My understanding is that the slowing of the Earth is due to tidal forces exerted on the Earth by the Moon. In simple Newtonian terms, the tital bulge of the ocean isn't directly under the moon -- it's dragged by the rotation of the earth to a position a number of degrees off from where you'd expect (high tide isn't when the Moon is at the zenith, as you might have expected). In consequence, the shape of the earth seen by the Moon's gravitational field isn't a sphere, and the Moon's gravity actually exerts a torque on the Earth. In turn, the Earth exerts an off-center force on the Moon, which is consequently gradually being spun up in its orbit. The Moon's orbit gets bigger, and the Earth slows down simultaneously. Another way to look at it is that the oceans are dragged around the Earth by the tides in the opposite directly from its rotation, and friction between the oceans and their beds is gradually slowing down the Earth. It's a little harder to see how energy and angular momentum are conserved when viewing it this way, tho. Either way, this has been going on at roughly the same rate for as long as there have been liquid oceans on the Earth. So, while it's no doubt contributing some amount of heat to the Earth, it's not a new effect; the current unusual warming of the Earth surely is unrelated to it. As the earth slows down, the daily temerature extremes will get greater since there will be more time at night for the temp to go low and more time in the day for it to go high. It is interesting to extrapolate back in time, the tidal effects on the earth's rotational speed, and the size of the moon's orbit. As you calculate backward, one million, two million, three million years, the earth is spinning faster and faster, bulging noticebly at the equator (oblate spheroid). The moon is significantly closer, raising the tidal drag to levels much higher than they are now. At some point in the past you reach the viability limit of the earth/moon planetary sub system where the earth is ready to fly apart due to centrifugal forces and the moon's close proximity is causing additional devastation resulting in a tremendous energy transfer rate between the two bodies. I havn't seen these calculations worked out in any detail, but I think this phenomena imposes an age limit of this system that is much younger than some evolutionary scientists would like it to be. Here is another peculiar thing that is hard to explain. If the earth has such high tidal drag because of all the liquid sloshing around and the moon has practically no tidal drag because of its solid structural stiffness, why is the moon phase locked to the earth rather than the other way around? Are the mass differences really enough to account for that? Has anyone come across either the calculations or results done by a reputable astrophysicist? Jeff
Science and Reality
One definition of reality could be this: Matter and energy distributed in various combinations across a finite space. Within these confines we have the natural. Anything outside of this is unnatural, or supernatural. Reality only feels real because we have five senses, composed of sensors which are also made of matter and energy, that feed our conscious mind (whatever that is), and allows us to be aware of the reality. Science investigates specific aspects and details of this interaction of matter and energy to give us better understanding of our surroundings. With this understanding we are then better able to manipiulate our surroundings to make our existence more enjoyable and perhaps more meaningful. Technology is then a measure of our ability to manipulate our surroundings. A.C. Clarke once said that "technology, sufficiently advanced, will always be mistaken for magic." If this is true, then even the most amazing observations we make in our reality should have a foundation based on scientific principles that can ultimately be understood. But, is there real magic that goes beyond the confines of our "matter and energy" reality? Consider the term: magic trick It is an oxymoron. A trick is not magic, and magic is no trick. A trick is the manipulation of matter and energy, in an artful manner, so as to fool the senses of observers, and convince them that the event falls outside the boundaries of reality. This is routinely done by skilled practitioners with some very basic technology. Real magic, if it exists, by definition eminates from beyond our "matter and energy" reality. Real magic could include anything from miracles down to evil spells. Are these things beyond science, or is the problemmerely that present scientific tools are just too primitive to deal with these incidents? Do we ignore these intrusions on our comfortable reality because we are not up to the task of investigating them, or do we face it head on? Do we say that we are going to do our science in our comfortable little corner of reality, and turn our backs on the big picture? Do we say, "This is too tough for me to face. I'm not going to deal with it."? I have seen responses of fear and denial on this forum. Should our discussions be controlled by either of those? We are all considered lunatics anyway for contemplating the existence of hydrinos, among other things. Let us keep open minds on anything that can affect the path of alternate energy development, even if itseems off topic to some. Perhaps we could have a set of spam codesmore specificthan "off topic" to protect the fearful, the scoffers, and the thoroughly annoyed. Jeff P.S. I have responded to many religious threads on this forum, but avoided starting any. This is the brightest group of people I have ever corresponded with. The diversity of beliefs and opinions voiced here is absolutely astounding. I am having a really good time with some of these discussions.
Re: ZPE, Naked Women and UFOs
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:46 AM Subject: RE: ZPE, Naked Women and UFOs How about this explanation? During many a theological debate with my mother, who is a Seventh Day Adventist, over the existence of Aliens etc. she stated that her/the churches belief is that there are many other sentient beings in this universe. She tried to explain that there are many beings that have their eyes on us as it is humanity that has been selected by GOD to have free will as a test and to represent all sentient life in this Universe etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah.(this is when I really turned off!) This explanation of your mom's explains some difficult things. With all the reports and sightings on file, we seem to be overrun with UFO's and aliens. It's like we are the center of the universe. Yet, we have no real contact. Perhaps the human race is in a boxing ring duking it out, and all these aliens are spectators who sometimes get too close to the action. Jeff
Re: ZPE, Naked Women and UFOs
I think it highly unlikely that we have in this world aliens coexisting with angels. We either have aliens masquerading as angels, or fallen angels masquerading as aliens. I personally suspect the latter. Then, there is also option three for those who prefer it, that both angels and aliens are imaginary. It seems that one of these three choices must be true. Is there somebody out there able to pull enough facts together to prove the truth in this matter? Jeff
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible PLUS JOKES
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 5:58 AM Subject: RE: OffTopic: Lust and the bible Hang on, hang on, the reply and forwarding of emails makes it look like I wrote this sh.t below. Cut it out Mr Revtec, how dare you! My name is Jeff. Jeff is spelled out at the bottom of my copy of the message. Don't know why it is not on yours. Here are a few new jokes to make you feel better. I hope this makes up for any distress I caused you. JEFF THOUGHTS to PONDER Life is sexually transmitted. Good Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die. Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach a person to use the Internet and they won't bother you for weeks. Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. All of us could take a lesson from the weather. It pays no attention to criticism. Why does a slight tax increase cost you two hundred dollars and a substantial tax cut saves you thirty cents? In the 60's, people took acid to make the world weird. Now the world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal. Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. I had amnesia once -- or twice. Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic. All I ask is a chance to prove that money can't make me happy. If the world were a logical place, men would ride horses sidesaddle. What is a free gift? Aren't all gifts free? They told me I was gullible and I believed them. Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to merge his car onto a freeway. Two can live as cheaply as one, for half as long. Experience is the thing you have left when everything else is gone. What if there were no hypothetical questions? One nice thing about egotists: They don't talk about other people. A flashlight is a case for holding dead batteries. I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure. The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity. Is Marx's tomb a communist plot? Show me a man with both feet firmly on the ground, and I'll show you a man who can't get his pants on or off. It's not an optical illusion. It just looks like one. Is it my imagination or do buffalo wings taste like chicken? No more from this thread from me unless it particularly funny because I do like a good joke. Jokes anyone, please let's have at least one joke posting per week. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of revtec Sent: 14 December 2005 22:24 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:53 AM Subject: RE: OffTopic: Lust and the bible The ones who lusted left heaven long ago and came here. According to the Book of Enoch, they are imprisoned here awaiting judgment. And, who will judge them? According to Paul, it is us! 1st Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? Is it these angels or all of them? What qualifies us to do that? Is it because that we, in the course of living our human lives, are graduates of the school of hard knocks. Whereas, the angels have not had to survive the kinds of challenges we routinely face? Jeff
Re: EIA Says Oil Prices to Fall
Those numbers look incredibly optimistic. They also imply a level of price stability that has to be nearly impossible over that span of time. Jeff - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 4:13 PM Subject: EIA Says Oil Prices to Fall http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/press/press265.html World crude oil prices, expressed in terms of the average price of imported light, low-sulfur crude oil to U.S. refiners, are projected to fall from current levels to about $47 per barrel in (2004 dollars) in 2014, then rise to $54 per barrel in 2025 and $57 per barrel in 2030. Guess they don't read Vortex. :-) ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:53 AM Subject: RE: OffTopic: Lust and the bible The ones who lusted left heaven long ago and came here. According to the Book of Enoch, they are imprisoned here awaiting judgment. And, who will judge them? According to Paul, it is us! 1st Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? Is it these angels or all of them? What qualifies us to do that? Is it because that we, in the course of living our human lives, are graduates of the school of hard knocks. Whereas, the angels have not had to survive the kinds of challenges we routinely face? Jeff
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 10:21 PM Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible Edmund Storms wrote: revtec wrote: - Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 4:43 PM Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible I admire your effort to calculate the size of the common flesh pool, which essentially makes us all brothers and sisters in sex. However, was Paul not using this concept as a quaint way to describe making a baby? Ed I don't think so. Here is the verse in New King James version: I Corinthian 6:16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For the two He says, shall become one flesh. We all know that we do not become literally one flesh when we have sex. We do not even join in any spiritual way. The act is simply the sharing of pleasure, except if a child results. The only time one flesh results is when love is present before the act. Therefore, this way of describing the sex act must have a nonliteral meaning. What do you think the nonliteral meaning might be? Keep in mind that transubstantiation of the mass was accepted as real among the early Christians. Similarly, your 21st century notion that there is no physical alteration of the flesh of the partners either as a result of intercourse or as a result of undergoing the marriage ceremony should be viewed as anachronistic when attempting to interpret the words of Paul. Furthermore, you must be a little careful when reading what Paul had to say about sex. It's been a while since I went through those sections of the Bible with any care, but as I recall Paul is a big-time prude and appeared to have some major hangups in the area. I would hesitate a long time before I'd rule out an interpretation of what he had to say on the grounds that it doesn't sound reasonable! His point about being single makes sense. He is saying that a single man can spend his life pleasing God, while a married man must spend much of his life pleasing his wife. See 1st Cor 7:33 Specifically, IIRC, he says (in one of the early, undisputed letters) that you should avoid sex entirely if possible. But, he goes on, if, unlike Paul himself (!!), you find that difficult, you should take the next-best choice and get married so you can have an outlet for your passions. He's not, as I recall, totally judgmental about it but his POV doesn't seem quite normal to me. With that said, I don't think he was telling folks not to fornicate because it makes illegitimate babies, any more than he was telling men not to have sex with men for that reason. And as to his statement that we become one flesh, he took it as really symbolically true AFAICT which is to say it meant _something_ of importance to him, but what it means isn't exactly clear! Note well that this same line is quoted someplace or other in support of the notion that divorce should not be allowed. Jesus clarified the full extent of the Law on this subject when He said Any man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery (Matthew. 5:32). Paul added more clarification in Romans 7:2-3 to the extent that, divorce or not, a woman is bound to her husband until he dies. But, we who choose to be under the grace of God thru the Blood of Jesus are not under the law. We are unable to keep the Law. The Law shows us what sin is, but does not enable us to rise above it. As Paul said in Romans 7:10 The commandment that was to bring life, I found to bring death. He goes on to say, The Law is spiritual, but we are carnal..For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do..Oh wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from the body of this death. We are all buried under a mountain of bad things we have commited, and each day, inspite of our best efforts, we continue to add to it. Do we want to justify this pile of crap in front of God at the Judgement or should we put it under the blood of Jesus and have it lifted from us? Jesus paid the price for all of our sin: past, present, and future. Out of reverence, respect, and gratitude, we must try to minimize the future stuff. God's salvation plan is so simple tha many people consider it too good to be true. It may be simple, but it is not easy. Salvation is free but it was not cheap. Can you imagine a God so loving that He would allow Himself to be murdered by His own creation in order to save it? Would God have the right to be angry with those who reject this plan? Jeff
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible
http://www.worldofquotes.com/author/Abraham-Lincoln/1/ Scroll down to around the 22nd phrase and read: When I do good, I feel good. When I do bad, I feel bad. And that's my religion. - Lincoln So. why did this work for Lincoln, but not for Nero, Stalin, Bundy, and dozens of other people we could quickly name? Do you think these guys felt bad about what they did? Maybe they even felt good about it! Do you think there is any limit to the horrors that an unrestrained human mind can justify? History seems to say no. We all exercise self restraint on a nearly continuous basis, and we do this to a set of internal behavioral standards that are constantly being updated. Updates that raise our standards are generally the result of receiving and accepting instruction. Standards may also be modified (usually downward) by circumstances that affect us. A trivial example is: standing around the water cooler for 20 minutes during the 10 minute break. Do you go back to your desk after 10 minutes or do you hang out longer? If the guys get away with it week after week, circumstances may lead you to a reduction in personal standards. A sharp word from the boss will bump everyones standard back up, at least temporarily. We all know which fellow worker will be the one to push the envelope again a few days later. Is reduction of behavioral standards a suitable definition for the word corruption? Here's a quote. I don't recall who said it. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Nero and Stalin had it on a national level, Bundy had it on a personal level. How do we avoid corruption in our lives on any level? It is fairly easy to see corruption in others. How do we identify it in ourselves? Identification is surely the first step toward fixing it. What would the next step be? Jeff
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible
- Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 9:17 PM Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible revtec wrote: - Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 4:43 PM Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible I admire your effort to calculate the size of the common flesh pool, which essentially makes us all brothers and sisters in sex. However, was Paul not using this concept as a quaint way to describe making a baby? Ed I don't think so. Here is the verse in New King James version: I Corinthian 6:16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For the two He says, shall become one flesh. We all know that we do not become literally one flesh when we have sex. We do not even join in any spiritual way. The act is simply the sharing of pleasure, except if a child results. The only time one flesh results is when love is present before the act. Therefore, this way of describing the sex act must have a nonliteral meaning. What do you think the nonliteral meaning might be? The idea of becoming one flesh with every sex partner you ever had, in addition to being one flesh with your wife, is perhaps just a way for Paul to help us visualize how bad he thinks it is to have sex outside of marriage. However, is it not possible or even likely that casual sex can have harmful effects on a person at three levels: physical, mental and spiritual. In the context of verses 9 to the end of the chapter, it is a disgrace to us, and dishonoring to God, to conduct ourselves in a promiscuous way. We must keep in mind that Paul is addressing believers who have accepted Jesus' sacrifice on the cross as the full penalty paid for their crimes against God. For us to continue in that behavior after being saved is, to say the least, not good. Jeff
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible
- Original Message - From: Wesley Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible The authors of this site aren't making the case why sex with strangers is bad. They just say its bad and I think thats hazardous in this age. VD and family conflict is the reason for the rules. It is interesting to note that the Bible does not state the above mentioned reasons for avoiding adultry and fornication. The only reason I can find is written by Paul in the NT when he points out that we become one flesh with the people we have sex with just as a husband and wife become one flesh. That made me consider the concept of a sexual network index. One's index number can be calculated by first adding up all the sex partners one has had and then, considering each of those partners one by one, add all of the people they have had sex with prior. The addition process is carried on step by step back through history until complete. Unfortunately the calculation process for many people soon breaks down to a form of gross estimating leading to a situation where one has to place a collection of zeros to the end of the calculated number. For people who believe in a 6,000 year creation time table, a half dozen zeros is probably enough. For people believing the evolutionary time frame, another couple of zeros may be in order. The index concept allows one to appreciate the rampent expanse of promiscuity, and the tremendous pools of common flesh that exist in the world. Jeff
Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible
- Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 4:43 PM Subject: Re: OffTopic: Lust and the bible I admire your effort to calculate the size of the common flesh pool, which essentially makes us all brothers and sisters in sex. However, was Paul not using this concept as a quaint way to describe making a baby? Ed I don't think so. Here is the verse in New King James version: I Corinthian 6:16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For the two He says, shall become one flesh. Jeff
Fw: Corn Burners
- Original Message - From: revtec [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 4:30 PM Subject: Re: Corn Burners - Original Message - From: Michael Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 4:13 PM Subject: Corn Burners Here is an interesting story about people converting from using natural gas or electricity to burning corn in specially designed stoves to heat their homes: What does the smoke smell like. The smell of burnt popcorn can make me gag. Jeff
Re: Re; deriving Power from Atmospheric PD
Sorry for the double post again. When I mistakenly double click the reply box it automatically sends before I get to write anything. Even if the .5 psi differential is real, the losses due to friction in 250 miles of duct would be overwhelming. Decades ago I was doing draft calcs for fossil fueled power stations. Typically you would need a set of forced draft fans and a set of induced draft fans to get a flow thru the boiler with the boiler operating at a slight negative pressure to prevent smoke and dust from polluting the inside of the building. This amounted to a few hundred feet of ductwork with velocities in the 50 to 60 mph range. Typical pressures developed by these fans were over 20 inches of water. Since one psi is approximately equal to two feet of water, it follows that the FD and ID fans in series are developing two psi to produce 60 mph air velocity thru perhaps 500 feet of ductwork and boiler equipment. Some of these fans are the size of small houses and consume tremendous amounts of power to perform their function. Although I have not done calculations, I estimate that .5 psi pushing air thru 250 mi of 10 ft dia pipe would produce a velocity so low that you may need a feather to detect any air motion. Further consideration of this differential scheme does not seem warrented. Jeff - Original Message - From: OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 10:06 AM Subject: Re; deriving Power from Atmospheric PD From: RC Macaulay John Coviello wrote.. For example, studying five years of atmospheric readings from Flagstaff and Tucson, Arizona, with an elevation difference of 3,700 feet, separated by 250 miles, they found the pressure difference to be in the range of 0.5 to 0.7 psi (pounds per square inch) on a daily basis, never going below 0.5 psi. ... Terminal velocity of standard air can be reached at near 5 psid. Calculating an air flow through a 2.5 meter diameter pipe, 250 mile long at a flow of 2500 miles per hour give me a headache and a big question mark??? Anyone at the patent office notice what the head loss would be ?? How about the weight of air at respective elevations ?? Hmmm. Rube Goldberg would love it. Richard Wait a minute! Unless I've completely misread something critical (The technology page is extreemly sparse) it seems to me that a key point completely missing from the equation is the fact that the pressure difference between Flagstaff and Tucson is (I suspect) primarily DUE to the fact that there is a 3,700 feet difference in altitude between the two cities. Lower elevation will naturally have a denser atmosphere, translating to higher pressure. If my some magic both cities could be stacked vertically one on top of the other where one remained 3,700 feet higher in elevation the psi pressure difference between the two cities would likely STILL be, I would imagine, around 0.5 psi. So what. That doesn't mean energy can be extracted from the psi difference. There is no way to take advantage of an altitude difference in pressure differences. The combination of accumulated atmospheric mass and gravity generate the atmospheric pressures between the different altitudes as a way to EQUALIZE stored energy in the form of atmospheric pressure. There is no (stored) inherent energy that can be extracted from such a scenario. Said differently: Seems to me that the only way one could take advantage of different psi atmospheric values would be if both city locations were situated at the exact same ALTITUDE while still maintaining a diference in psi levels. They clearly are not! If this scenario were possible it seems to me that a long time ago there would have been generators constructed up on top of high elevation mountains with wind pipes traveling all the way down to the base to take advantagea of the difference in psi pressures. The web site, at first glance looks very professional. I think it's a clever joke. If anyone knows more on this subject please speak up! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: The Cheapest Way To Fix The Energy Crisis (and lots of other crises)
- Original Message - From: Kyle Mcallister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:09 PM Subject: Re: The Cheapest Way To Fix The Energy Crisis (and lots of other crises) That is a good question. If we had the means to target races differently, I suggest that the obvious race to be given the 'full treatment' would be orientals, who make up a disproportionate number of people. Note to Jed: This doesn't seem like humor to me... Great plan../sarcasm However, it is a topic full of pitfalls, and the best way might be simply to let the infertility drug fall gently and equally among everyone, so that orientals would end up being 1/6 of their present numbers, whites 1/6, and so on. We'll make sure you and yours are given this gift of infertility. a smaller No big difference. Half enough is just as bad and none at all...neither can get the job done. Why would you think it necessary? You appear to have reading problems; obviously, and as I stated, those alive after the culling took hold would live off the fat of the land, the elderly included. No, I read perfectly fine, thank you. What gives anyone the right to implement such a plan? Myself, I believe if a country implemented such an evil and Nazi-like plan, then there would need to be a a definite population reduction: elimination of those responsible for implementing it. Nice nameGoering. A sadly childish remark. Unfortunately, seeing your remarks, it seems to fit perfectly. George Bush has an opportunity, a short-lived one whose window is quickly closing, to go down in history as one of mankind's greatest benefactors. Unfortunately, he will not have the needed courage, and will end up being remembered as an idiot. Bush has destroyed himself enoughwe do not need him to become the American Fuhrer. Better an idiot than a genocidal maniac. Of course, this is only a noble dream until we have the 'anti-fertility' drug; I do not know the state of the art, but suspect it is further along than is publicly known. Noble dream? You have got to be bloody kidding me. My guess is that by using this method it is also *much* easier to target specific races: slanty eyes, or dark skin, or some obscure gene that marks you out. Make a master race so to speak. This is disgusting. The true master race is one where there is both diversity and unity. What you are suggesting is absolute madness. Nazi, Schmazi: a tired, overworked cliche to pin on anybody who differs just a little too much from your opinions about anything. I have no problem with people whose opinions differ from mine. I pin this label on you, because it fits you. What you are saying is almost precisely what the Third Reich had to say, the elimination of the sub races and unfit for the benefit of all, to create the 1000 year Reich. You speak as though you are Mein Kampf in the flesh. Something drastic must be done soon, or we will be living in a termatary, with or without cold fusion. We need breathing room might be another way to put that remark. Don't ever take office. We have enough problems with idiots there as it is. We do not need the outright insane and genocidal there. And if anyone, including you, gets in a position to actually get a plan such as this in motion, I pray that they will not live long. My fellow Vortexians, this is the third person who has seriously suggested that something like this be done in as many months. My faith in the human race and its future is shaken. I really hope this turns out to be a cruel sense of humor, but I do think he is serious. Bill, I second Steven Vincent Johnson's remarks; this is too much. --Kyle
Re: The Cheapest Way To Fix The Energy Crisis (and lots of other
- Original Message - From: "Kyle Mcallister" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: vortex-l@eskimo.comSent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:09 PMSubject: Re: The Cheapest Way To Fix The Energy Crisis (and lots of othercrises) My faith in the human race and its future is shaken.Kyle, you seem surprised that there are really guys like Goering out there.There has to be a bunch of them because their reasoning is based onevolutionary beliefs and we all know how pervasive that is.Here is another really unsettling consideration. If evolution is true, thenone race would naturally be superior to the others. For the races to beequal would be totally unnatural.I think God made us equal, but evolution definitely would not. Evolutionwas one of the foundations of Hitler's Nazi Germany. It justified theiractions by allowing them to declare Jewish people an inferior race. Theworst horrors the world has ever seen were based on evolutionary beliefs!It's "survival of the fittest" so Darwin said: dog eat dog, the law of thejungle, looking out for number one!So, what group of people are the fittest? Who is hanging on to the highestrung of the evolutionary ladder? Is it the biggest? The strongest? Thesmartest? The whitest? Or, will it will end up being the group with themost power due to accrued wealth?Are we the products of eons of selfish competition, or are we sons of God?Where does morality such as compassion and self sacrifice come from? Theact of reducing ones own chance of survival to increase the chances for oneless fortunate is a stark violation of evolutionary principles. It isillogical. If evolution produces morality than it must be seen as a harmfulmutation.We have all encountered or at least heard of people who seem to have nomorality. Everything they do is filtered thru "what will this get for me".Some people who appear to do good unselfishly are merely angling for agreater good for themselves in the future. Beyond that there are people whodo good with no chance of compensation. But, some of these do it simplybecause of an addiction to the "warm fuzzies". True compassion and selfsacrifice may, unfortunately, be quite a rare thing.Nevertheless, we see and hear of acts of compassion and self sacrifice on aregular basis that stop us in our tracks, bring tears to our eyes, reaffirmour faith in humanity, and make us say to ourselves, "I hope that I amcapable of that".Faith in God draws us upward, but belief in evolution is a snare that willdrag us downward to destruction.Jeff
Re: Secondary Disaster hits New Orleans
Between listening to talk radio and reading posts from this group, my head is spinning. Will the real planet earth please stand up, so I can figure out which one I'm on! Jeff - Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 7:24 PM Subject: OT: Secondary Disaster hits New Orleans Who is Joe Allbaugh ? Disaster Pimp, bag-man deluxe, or just a very lucky citizen? http://slate.msn.com/id/2125756/ The Shaw Group - a Louisiana construction firm, represented by Joe Allbaugh, President George Bush's former campaign manager, and former head of FEMA - won a $100-million **no-bid** FEMA contract to work on a variety of tasks, within hours of the Bush disaster relief announcement (as...with Tom's help there is no Delay). No one seems to know what the $100-million worth of **no-bid** FEMA tasks consist of, other than personal enrichment and graft, nor why this huge contract was not let out for competitive bidding, as is normal even in disasters - nor why Allbaugh was even allowed to get his foot in the door - a seeming conflict of interest for the former FEMA head. This is almost a joke, were it not a dead serious payback, at great taxpayer expense, to a former Bush campaign manager. Shaw Group also won a $100-million contract from the Army Corps of Engineers to work on de-watering New Orleans. The Corps says it contacted four companies, and Shaw was the only one to bid. Check out Shaw's PAC contributions The other companies deny that any timely request for bids was made by the Army. The $200 million net for no-bid work, arranged by Allbaugh could probably be done for a quarter of that sum, given normal competitive bidding, say the watchdog groups, who are never covered on the national News. That would be unpatriotic, no? Allbaugh's fee for both - reported to be $30 million - off the top. Typical finder's fee according to insiders, nothing unusual ??? Thank you very much, Dick and George. Yes Dick is in here with the payola also. Whenever taxpayer money is there for the taking, Cheney's shadow is overlooking everyting. Another Allbaugh client - KBR, a wholly owned subsidiary of Vice President Dick Cheney's former firm, Halliburton Co. and an offshore tax haven - also was hired immediately for Katrina work, ostensibly under an existing contract with the Navy but with **no-bid** add-ons. The Navy even tried hard not to mention the name Halliburton until asked about who owned KBR. It appears the same cast of characters is raking up these contracts that got money from the Iraq reconstruction, said Beth Daley, spokeswoman for the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington advocacy group. Within days of this disaster the politicos have there hands in the taxpayers pocket. Do they have no shame?
Re: The Grip of Gas
- Original Message - From: Standing Bear [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 12:56 AM Subject: Re: The Grip of Gas On Tuesday 27 September 2005 17:47, Jed Rothwell wrote: Michael Foster wrote: I have a number of personal observations that seem to illuminate what you are talking about. I noticed that the general level of traffic in the Los Angeles area dropped off rather dramatically when the price of gasoline exceeded about $2.50/gal. . . . Yes, there is anecdotal evidence like that coming in from all over. And it is not merely an impression. Actual consumption dropped from 9.4 million gallons to 8.8 million gallons. (See the N. Y. Times article I referenced.) Some other straws in the wind: An Atlanta GM car dealership recently had the compact cars moved out in front of the lot with large, handmade signs saying 30 MPG! Toyota is bombarding cable channels with advertisements featuring their high MPG models, including the Prius, again with big letters announcing 35 MPG and 60 MPG (way ahead of GM). These are cheesy advertisements that look like they were ginned up in a hurry, with a soundtrack of children cheering in the background. The traffic level seemed to recover about two weeks after that. Unfortunately, consumers may get used to these prices and go back to their old habits. This will do nothing to solve the problem, and it will suck a great discretionary income out of the economy. It works like the parable of the frog in hot water (water that is gradually heated). PLEASE NOTE that is merely a parable, no more true than Aesop's fables about talking foxes. A real frog will jump out of the pot as soon as the water becomes uncomfortably warm. People, on the other hand . . . I hate to see the public suffer, especially poor people who have to commute to work in old gas guzzlers, but for the good of the country and the environment I wish the government would impose a tax to raise the price to $4 per gallon permanently. The tax would increase to $1.50 if the base price falls to $2.50. I wish the leaders would tell the citizens that oil is running out, and it is time to make sacrifices and make changes. Plus it should say we can solve this problem with new technology such as plug-in hybrids, we do not have to wait 40 years for hydrogen cars. Even the oil company advertisements now say that we are extracting oil twice as fast as we are finding new reserves, and I think they are lying. As others have pointed out here, OPEC members and major oil companies are probably exaggerating reserves by a large margin. OPEC members do this so that OPEC will give them a larger market allocation, and oil companies do it to prop up their stock prices. There have been no substantial discoveries of oil in the lower 48 states since the 1930s, and there never will be. There is no more oil waiting to be found anywhere on earth. Of course improved extraction techniques will stretch out supplies. - Jed All that four dollar gas price is going to do is guarantee a depression and radicalization of our politics as the poor finally are driven to find their voice. The better solution and a better one for political stability is to impose rationing. Another solution would be to follow the Mexican example and nationalize the resource and its distribution networks, as the industry has shown itself rapaciousely avaricious on too many occasions. Once nationalized, the problem of fair distribution can be solved by rationing. We could encourage the sidelining of gas guzzlers by taxing new large vehicles like SUVs. The old ones will wear out in time and sideline themselves. Standing Bear
Re: The Grip of Gas
Sounds like socialism to me. It worked great in the USSR. I'm sure it will be terrific here. Nixon tried gas rationing. We had gas lines wrapped around the block. The law of supply and demand will set the proper price and there will be no lines and no shortages. People who decide they can't afford it will do one of the following: 1. get a smaller car 2. carpool 3. take public transportation 4. get a motor cycle 5. get a bicycle 6. move closer to their place of employment People will do none of these above options without the economic pressure of a rising gas price. The days of the 60-90 minute commute must come to an end. Only high gas prices will end it . Jeff - Original Message - From: Standing Bear [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 12:56 AM Subject: Re: The Grip of Gas All that four dollar gas price is going to do is guarantee a depression and radicalization of our politics as the poor finally are driven to find their voice. The better solution and a better one for political stability is to impose rationing. Another solution would be to follow the Mexican example and nationalize the resource and its distribution networks, as the industry has shown itself rapaciousely avaricious on too many occasions. Once nationalized, the problem of fair distribution can be solved by rationing. We could encourage the sidelining of gas guzzlers by taxing new large vehicles like SUVs. The old ones will wear out in time and sideline themselves. Standing Bear
Re: New Orleans; the aftermath
And now we have Rita heading for the gulf. I don't think those hasty levee repairs can even survive a tropical storm. They are too low and too soft! Jeff - Original Message - From: RC Macaulay [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 8:04 AM Subject: Re: New Orleans; the aftermath Bruce, New Orleans IS MARSHLAND !! That means there is no bottom like bedrock etc. The land sinks which means the more you build ,the deeper it sinks. That is the reason the levees collapsed. They settled 4 feet in ten years. In itself, thats no big deal ,BUT, not only did they settle UNEVENLY, the pumps were located at the base where they could flood. Combine the worse engineeering with total, absolute public corruption and what you have is nawlins Richard - Original Message - From: Wesley Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 1:10 AM Subject: Re: New Orleans; the aftermath RC Macaulay wrote: Only a small segment of New Orleans should ever be rebuilt. There is no way to provide protection for future flooding unless the city is rebuilt upon the mother of all gambling casino barges... hmmm ! Richard Standing Bear wrote.. Richard, Oh yes it can be rebuilt! Why would anyone be dumb enough to rebuild a city below sealevel once its been destroyed ? If you want it , you build it and you pay for it with your money,not mine. Consider the amount of the increase in insurance rates alone coming as a result of poor decisions made years ago. When is enough insanity , enough? Richard The land values in the area are not zero. We can rebuild three to six story buildings with interlinked floors above the third floor and the ground floor being car parking squash courts, indoor soccer, basket ball, dance halls. Covered drying areas for clothing also works. Fewer buildings, more parkland and build up so the first floor with anyone living on it will be above sea level plus 4 meters. The power, data, water, sewers etc can be rebuilt so they are flood proof or above the sea level. It can be done but it probably wont be done.
Re: why the levee failed
There is a lot more wrong with this story. How is a diver going to find a hand sized piece of concrete in that murky water? Not only does he find a piece, but in zero visibility, he can also recognize peculiar features on the rock that cause him to bring it to the surface. After all, this isn't the clean water from the canal he is swimming in, it is town water. (Is there anyone on this list that failed to notice that on all the coverage of the broken levees and scenes of repair work, water is flowing from the town side to the canal side!) For a 10 lb piece of exposed concrete to lie unburied close to the levee break is nearly impossible. Here's a little personal experience with this kind of thing: I have a pond fed from an adjacent creek thru a 6 pipe. A one foot high dam backs up water to the pipe inlet. The dam is composed of ten tons of high density rip rap called Trap Rock in sizes up to 200 lbs each. Normally I can cross this creek without getting my ankles wet. During a really dry spell I have a bodily function that can exceed its flow rate. Last summer we had a large T-storm that raised the water level in the creek by nearly three feet. After the flood subsided, I was stunned to see that all $250 worth of Trap Rock were gone without a trace and that I had a three foot scoured out channel in its place. The story is bogus and Turner is nuts. Isn't it convenient that the only piece of evidence has been lost! Jeff - Original Message - From: thomas malloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 1:21 PM Subject: why the levee failed According to this report the levee didn't fail, it exploded www.halturnershow.com/DiversFindExplosiveResidueOnRupturedLevy.html
Re: Cold Electricity
- Original Message - From: thomas malloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:38 PM Subject: Cold Electricity PES published the following article on E V Gray, http://pesn.com/2005/08/19/9600152_EV_Gray_nephew/ Part of the discussion mentioned Peter Linderman's book on cold electricity. Shortly after it's publication I emailed Peter and asked him if there was any experimental evidence for what he was saying, or if he was just selling books. I never received a reply, so I have relegated Peter to the status of vaporware merchant.
Re: Cold Electricity
Is this the same cold electricity Floyd Sweet was working with? Jeff - Original Message - From: thomas malloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:38 PM Subject: Cold Electricity PES published the following article on E V Gray, http://pesn.com/2005/08/19/9600152_EV_Gray_nephew/ Part of the discussion mentioned Peter Linderman's book on cold electricity. Shortly after it's publication I emailed Peter and asked him if there was any experimental evidence for what he was saying, or if he was just selling books. I never received a reply, so I have relegated Peter to the status of vaporware merchant.
Re: IEEE Article on Plug-In Hybrids
- Original Message - From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 11:15 AM Subject: Re: IEEE Article on Plug-In Hybrids From: Jed Rothwell Plus, I forgot to mention, most electric cars will be recharged overnight, when most electricity comes from baseline nuclear power in most states. (I think it is around 80%.) What it boils down to is that with electric cars, we could have millions of nuclear powered automobiles, with no change to the present infrastructure. Unfortunately, this would likely not be the case without some incentives. Most people would pull into their garage and plug in their charger thus adding to the peak load in the summer. They would need an incentive to plug in before going to bed. A special charging plug and a timed outlet solves that problem. It could also be made tamper proof. Jeff
Fw: OFF TOPIC: Intelligent design
- Original Message - From: revtec [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 10:45 AM Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: Intelligent design The hypothesis that an object is nonphysical and timeless -- invisible in short -- can never be proved or falsified, so it is not scientific. It sounds like you are saying that any truth that cannot be proven true must be accepted as a lie! You can't even accept the possibility that it might be true but must automatically insist that it be false simply because your proving methods, regardless of how inadequate or primitive they may be, are unable to deal with the hypothesis. Can we not consider the possibility that life in this universe, consisting of the interaction of matter and energy, is way to complex to have evolved, as has been calculated by several credible mathamaticians, but that a creator being outside of the universe, whose life operates on entirely different principles, produced this universe and the life we experience?And, that the totally different life form of the creator, being so different, IS amenable to evolutionary principles on that plane? There is a rather serious paradox here. Can a being, who is simple enough to evolve, rise to such a high level of intelligence and power that it is able to produce things that are too complex to evolve? I presented this question before and no one commented. In fact I said a few things over the years that I thought were somewhat profound without getting a single response. What I can't figure out is whether the points were either unassailable or so stupid that they were unworthy of a response from anyone. In any event, the model I presented solves all the problems except that our Holy Scientific Method is useless, and that many people, who are absolutely unwilling to accept the authority of a higher power, will say, do, and believe almost anything to disprove the existence of said higher power. Jeff P.S. It really baffles me how the scientific method can be invoked to eliminate the possibility of a creator while it is ignored when considering all of the pseudoevidence for evolution.
Re: OT Re: July 4
Who thinks of freedom and liberty as a threat? Those who do should be threatened by sombody. Slavery still exists in this world based on nationality, religion, and gender. We dealt with our slave problem nealy 150 yrs ago, but slavery still thrives in this world. The slave owners and traders hate us and fear us. They apparently have little to fear from you. Jeff - Original Message - From: Nick Palmer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 5:01 AM Subject: OT Re: July 4 RS Macaulay wrote:- America is more than a place, a nation, it is a dream understood by all the world. Flawed as it may be, this nation remains the hope of the world. The trouble with many Americans is they have this "dream" of how America is. The American constitution isindeed a fine piece of work but the reality of how America behaves is that it is a bully, imposing its view of the world wherever it sees fit to protect mostly imagined threats tothe "American way of life". This might be news to you but, in most of the world,Bush's America is not seen as the "hope of the world" instead it is actually seen as probably the biggest threat to world stability for a long time. Nick Palmer Brit, European, Citizen of the World.
Re: OT: Game Over
in keeping with the sentiment of several prior post's including that excellent one of Nick, that there is NO physical evidence whatever: nada, zero zilch - of any physical alien presence, now or ever, but in many cases sbstituing the word divine for alien can move one over many hurtles. This is the delemma. If even 10 % of the UFO sightings and alien contacts in the world are authentic (actually believed by the subject and not faked), then the Earth is undeniably the crossroads of the universe! And, what would cause us to be at this juncture? Surely not our geographical location in this galaxy. The only logical explanation is that the human race is really, really, REALLY important to someone or some group. Now, couple this with the fact that for all of these visits and attention paid to us, we have no physical evidence. A conclusion can be drawn from this, that these entities, who are so determined to convince us of the existance of advanced alien technologies, have in fact almost no power to affect us on a material level, that sightings may merely be visions inserted into peoples brains and not actual sightings at all! There is an extremely large amount of evidence for a subtle guiding influence which itself has only one common trait - extremely focused intellignece taking human form and directing the subject-species along a particular path Many New Agers have their spirit guides whom they believe to be spiritual benefactors. Might these be demons who are acting nice for now because it fits their purpose. These demons (fallen angels) do not take their marching orders from God. When the time is right they may manifest themselves more openly, masquerading as aliens, because we have been primed for decades to receive them as technically advanced aliens and not as demons. This plan may not be going well because of all the scary movies. The nasty aliens ginned up by Hollywood are so bad they could make an honest to God demon look like a descent fellow. If there is a hypothesis that fits the facts better than this one I haven't heard it yet. Jeff
Fw: Things to ponder
Title: Message Things to Ponder Here are a few more things to think about that you probably have never thought about before... What disease did cured ham actually have? How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage? Why is it that people say they "slept like a baby" when babies wake up like every two hours? If a deaf person has to go to court, is it still called a hearing? If you drink Pepsi at work in the Coke factory, will they fire you? Why are you IN a movie, but you're ON TV? Why do people pay to go up tall buildings and then put money in binoculars to look at things on the ground? Why do we choose from just two people for President and fifty for Miss America? Why do doctors leave the room while you change? They're going to see you naked anyway. If a 911 operator has a heart attack, whom does he/she call? Why is "bra" singular and "panties" plural? Who was the first person to look at a cow and say, "I think I'll squeeze these dangly things here, and drink whatever comes out!" Who was the first person to look at an egg come out of a chickens ass and say "That looks like some good eatin!"? Why do toasters always have a setting that turns the toast into a charcoal briquette , which no decent human being would eat? Why is there a light in the fridge and not in the freezer? When your photo is taken for your driver's license, why do they tell you to smile? If you are stopped by the police and asked for your license, are you going to be smiling? Can a hearse carrying a corpse drive in the carpool lane? Why do people point to their wrist when asking for the time, but don't point to their crotch when they ask where the bathroom is? If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons? Is Disney World the only people trap operated by a mouse? Do the Alphabet song and Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star have the same tune? Why did you just try singing the two songs above? Why do they call it an asteroid when it's outside the hemisphere, but call it a hemorrhoid when it's in your butt? Did you ever notice that when you blow in a dog's face, he gets mad at you,but when you take him for a car ride; he sticks his head out the window? Do you ever wonder why you gave me your e-mail address in the first place? --- Headers
Re: Two more pieces
The tasp (electronarcotic) will be much easier to perfect than any of the rest of this stuff. http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=59 And once it becomes available, interest in anything beyond will drop to zero as everyone plugs in and drops out. Civilization is KO'd! Jeff - Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 1:13 PM Subject: Two more pieces Two more pieces of an emerging picture-puzzle - an evolutionary-jump jigsaw puzzle that is, were announced recently in the science press. On NPR today was an update of the non-invasive brain-computer interface technology, which already offers more control than once thought possible. A brain-computer interface (BCI) which translates intentional tiny electric signals detected from the scalp or other external cells, from the user into a command structure which the computer understands is now inevitable. It offers comparable precision, speed and accuracy to systems that rely on electrodes surgically implanted in the brain. Researchers at the Department of Health's Wadsworth Center Laboratories have been working on this for some time. It has been widely assumed that only invasive devices could control complex movements, such as operating a word processing program or a motorized accessories by thought alone. Here is a past story, now dated the new advances which do not appear to be online yet. http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6745 Which brings to mind another logical progression and step in this technology, which is the subject of two remarkable cinematic masterpieces - Strange Days and Natalie Wood's last film, the under-appreciated and aptly named movie Brainstorm. Back to real science (as opposed to overly-dramatized prophecy). The second piece of this perceived quickening is more aptly appropriate for that descriptive word, in that it involves not just stem cells, which can be grown more reliably now: http://science.slashdot.org/science/05/05/20/1447203.shtml?tid=191tid=14 And some mention is given of the next logical step, given that stem cells still require donated human eggs. It will be a more significant advance in medical engineering when we learn to use specialized stem cells to also grow the necessary human ovary in the lab, and then harvest the eggs from that line. It doesn't really matter if the Luddites keep the USA from doing this, as many countries are now capable. Today's news story comes from S. Korea. Several labs are looking into this new angle, and natural progression, of harvesting ovaries already, so the only question is will the US be left out of being on the ground floor of this or not. We can let the many 'Fall-wells' in the bigotry profession fume and bombast all they want, but the process of advancement is inevitable, somewhere, and the only question now for government is who will benefit the most from genetic engineering. The advances now in the lab will dramatically decrease the need for female donors, or eliminate that part of the equation, and ultimately whatever Moore's law-equivalent comes to genetic engineer will allow almost every wealthy individual to have his/her own stem cells cloned and put into cryo-storage, starting at a young age, put in storage ostensibly for future contingencies, but not exclusively... Here is where is it is all leading. Imagine a youngster who is born this year (to wealthy and ambitious parents in S. Korea) and which child will encounter a situation in about 2008 when advances in computers will mean that he may have ownership by that time, of a near human equivalent AI thinking machine, for the cost of a luxury automobile, which machine and auxiliary equipment (perhaps with some implants or fashion accessories) will become: 1) first... his combination nanny, 24/7 big brother and playmate (of the benign variety), guardian, kindergarten teacher, reward giver, entertainer, story teller, and more parent than any human parent could ever be. 2) second... his record keeper and diarist of **everything** relevant that happened in his life, and life-long professor and expert on all things. Keeping detail visual images of every incident. 3) Then become his legal guardian, who recommends an embryonic cloned duplicate be started and saved cryogenically... and then manages and controls his wealth as it is inherited or earned. 4) Becomes and integral part, and managing-partner of this persons' whole day-to-day existence, for his normal lifetime 5) probably by that time, the machine will have the same continuity aspirations of the alter-ego owner, with whom each have shared a long-term near-identity. We know what happens now when pet owners who have a long relationship with a mere family pet, a trusted dog or cat as a companion, and that animal dies. They will pay six figures for pet cloning. Multiply that many-fold and imagine the
Re: Explantion for some caviation OU
- Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 9:48 PM Subject: Explantion for some caviation OU Thinking about Knuke's recent post, and the anomaly he experienced with unfortunate long-term health risks, I believe that I have an answer now and it does not involved neutrons, proliferation risks, nor the increased possibility of terrorism, as some of us feared... nor necessarily hydrinos - but instead a prevalent common household toxic gas- to wit: radon. Although radon is technically a gas, it is so heavy and active that it sticks like glue to many surface-charged dielectrics. The mechanism is as follows: Radon and other volatile radioactive species diffuse from the ground due to the natural decay of uranium and/or thorium which are ubiquitous in shale, granite and coal - or in the older ceramic tiles which were once used as a glaze (fired unrefined yellow cake) which as Knuke mentioned, was prized for its color and was fairly common in ceramics before being removed from the marker (but not all kitchens). Surface shale is also ubiquitous in parts of Russia, where the these devices are said to work well. Soils with high levels of shale, granite, or where phosphate fertilizers are used can be radioactive (1-1000 or more ppm of actinides or 40K) but this won't necessarily be picked up by the standard CD GM detectors - plus- in the decay chain, the volatile species (aka daughters): isotopes of radon, xenon, polonium etc. have half life of maybe 10^10 times or more shorter than the U or Th. These will show up on any good lab rad-monitor, except the common CD variety which were made for wartime post-catastrophe use. When concentrated, even your civilian-defense monitor will pick it up. The answer to the Knuke-anomaly likely involves the concentration of radon and daughters on the surface of the tiles, possible from both the tile itself and the local soil degassing, and then the decay of these being accelerated in the cavitator. If you do not believe that this can take place, take a tissue and wipe your computer screen and then test with a sensitive meter. I tried this with my CDV-700 which gives one click every five to ten seconds as background. After wiping a 21 in monitor and a TV screen with the tissue, I got no change. This seems pecular since I know that there are houses within 12 mi with radon problems and mineable grade of U within 20 mi. I still don't understand how Knuke got such a massive dose of radion in only five sec! Do you know if there was any residual contamination of his turbine parts detectable after the incident? You should get a surprisingly high reading, and you can multiply this by the surface area of the tiles in question and the time between tile cleanups, which in Knuke's case, may have been well, people who live in glass houses should not hurl housecleaning contumelies, so to speak And all you need to do to accelerated decay is to charge the stuff in a van de Graff. Don't bother to quote me the normal textbook garbage about accelerated decay being impossible, as anyone can demonstrate it so easily that it is now considered by most to have been planned disinformation, and a relic of the cold war era. Another related test which can be used to pinpoint the elemental source of radioactivity can be found online - as well as the important decay-curve files. The test involves measuring the rate against the background, and then logging over time with datalogging software. The concentration of radon daughters on computer screens is caused by electrostatic attraction, and wiping the screen will concentrate this even more so that you can get several hundred CPM, and with the time-decay-curve you can find what isotopes are involved due to the short half-life, and you have almost proof-positive the radon source. There used to be tables for this process and instructions on the Aware site: http://www.aw-el.com/ This is not an expensive meter, folks, and every garage experimenter should have this or better. My old one is a slightly better French Oritech model but it is small (smaller than a 'mouse'), inexpensive, accurate and reliable, and if you have an unused laptop, then you have data-logging built-in and can save about $10,000 over new lab equipment- which might have some added bells-and-whistles, but negative economic value. With the legal sources of radiation, which means thoriated, you should get readings of around 300-600 uR/hr for welding rods whereas the background rate is typically 10 uR/hr. A hot [i.e. not recently cleaned, computer screen may have up to 100 uR/hr or 10 times background, so your grandmother was correct that watching TV too close-up will make you go blind] I suspect that the sum total of Knuke's tiles was in the thousands and then the rate accelerated by cavitation, so he got a dose that may cause long
Re: Cavitation neutrons - was: Blast from the Past -
The silence is deafening. I have been waiting impatiently for Jones or someone to respond to these posts by Knuke and speculate on how a home brew cavitating turbine, spiked with mere traces of fissionable material, can within five seconds of operation deliver a near lethal dose of radiation! Dosn't this level of performance makes the Huffman machine the Mother of all LENR devices? Someone more skilled than I in the art of duplicating needs to check this out! Is the silence on the subject due to the fact that every Vortex member with facilities is doing just that? Jeff P.S. I at least thought someone might imply that the account was impossible and then back up their position with some unasailable theorizing. - Original Message - From: Michael Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 1:15 AM Subject: Re: Cavitation neutrons - was: Blast from the Past - Moin Jeff. The runaway events happened on the first model that I built. I did these runs in my kitchen less than a foot away from these radioactive tiles, but I had no clue that they were radioactive until later. While trying to get a subsequent model to do the runaway thing again, I came up with the crazy idea of lacing the water, thinking that it may have played a roll. I used the geiger counter quite a bit while wiping down the tiles, but didn't turn it on for the initial test run itself. I was in a hurry, and wanted to see what would happen. Now I know. This is all in the VG archives, if you want to download all of those huge files and run text searches. At Bill Beaty's website there used to be a photo of the first model, torn down, and sitting on my kitchen counter. One more word of warning though, if you go onto Bill Beaty's website, leave a trail of breadcrumbs or make bookmarks or something so that you don't get lost. Whenever I visit Bill's website, I always get lost for hours, if not days. It's pretty weird in there. Knuke Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2005 23:26 schrieb revtec: - Original Message - From: Michael Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 2:21 PM Subject: Re: Cavitation neutrons - was: Blast from the Past - I reread your article in 1995 vol. 1 , no. 1of IE which concluded with your impending success. What happened? Didn't your next model work? I recall knowing about your kitchen sheathed in yellow cake tiles, but can't recall if you told me that or if it was mentioned in a subsequent article that I am yet to rediscover. The implication was that the runaway operation was possibly caused because the experiment was surrounded by radioactive walls. I don't recall that you ever indicated that you used uranium laced water to fuel the turbine. Was it during the runaway describe in the article that you suffered injury or was it during a later experiment? Jeff
Re: Name of the Game
- Original Message - From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 9:51 AM Subject: Re: Name of the Game Yes. I believe all here would like to see it. Here's the transcript from 1966: Dear Jeffrey, Thank you for your letter of 8 Feb. I can only reply briefly as I am here to complete the novel 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY which Stanley Kubric is already filming in England. (CINERAMA, color, for release early 67). Frankly, I can't remember all the motives behind THE CITY AND THE STARS which I began (in the earlier version AGAINST THE FALL OF NIGHT - Gnome Press) in 1937.) And I've written so many books since then that I don't remember it very well! There was a more concious attempt at a Utopia in CHILDHOOD'S END - the second part. Incidently you must also read Huxley's last novel, ISLAND (patterned to some extent on Ceylon.) I don't believe any society can be static - certainly not for as long as I postulated in CITY! For my more recent views, see PROFILES OF THE FUTURE. I really wrote CITY for fun, as a voyage of exploration. Any philosophy is incidental! All good wishes, Arthur C Clarke Jeff
Re: Cavitation neutrons - was: Blast from the Past -
- Original Message - From: Michael Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 2:21 PM Subject: Re: Cavitation neutrons - was: Blast from the Past - I reread your article in 1995 vol. 1 , no. 1of IE which concluded with your impending success. What happened? Didn't your next model work? I recall knowing about your kitchen sheathed in yellow cake tiles, but can't recall if you told me that or if it was mentioned in a subsequent article that I am yet to rediscover. The implication was that the runaway operation was possibly caused because the experiment was surrounded by radioactive walls. I don't recall that you ever indicated that you used uranium laced water to fuel the turbine. Was it during the runaway describe in the article that you suffered injury or was it during a later experiment? Jeff
Re: Name of the Game
I got a reply from Mr. Clark to a letter I sent him around 1965 in which he compared Childhood's End to a previous work City and the Stars. I don't recall that he said anything profound, but if I can figure where I put it, I can scan it or transcribe it for anyone who wishes to see it. Jeff - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 9:47 PM Subject: Re: Name of the Game Jones Beene wrote: Indeed. Hard to believe it was published 53 years ago... but it could have been yesterday. Author Arthur was 36 at the time - in his prime; and will likely be seen as the preeminent prophet of the 20th Century. I hadn't consiously thought about that book in years, but recent post was unmistakably influenced by it. There is an interesting disclaimer on the credit page: The opinions expressed in this book are not those of the author ... meaning cryptically, one might suppose, that no opinion is really our own. Go figure... Well, I think Jed has contact with Sr.ACC. I have asked what was the inspiration for the book; but, have not received a definitive answer. As I recall, author Arthur said something like Check the ### release of the book.. If only (w)he (-k)knew.
Re: Blast from the Past - quotes from Edward Teller
Hey Knuke, I have a question for you. What ever happened to your experiment with the run away plexiglass cavitating turbine. That was a really interesting article in IE about ten years ago. So interesting that at that time I attempted to approximate in steel what you did in plastic. I'm sure Mike Carrell would chide me for not duplicating your machine exactly, but that's just the way I am. After all, your version melted, and I didn't want that to happen to me. I put about a thousand bucks into it without getting any notable results. (That on top of a few thousand into PAGD.) Not long after that, I spent a hundred dollars on refrigerator magnets a la Greg Watson. I met Gene Mallove twice and spoke to him numerous times on the phone. He was a bit dismayed when I called once to cancel my subscription to IE. He said, don't you like the magazine? I said, Sure I do. I just can't afford it any more because I keep trying to build this stuff. Back to the turbine. Perhaps a lot of info was posted years ago and I missed it. Could someone fill me in? Jeff
OFF TOPIC Father of Murdered Columbine High School Student, Rachel Scott, Speaks to Congress
Title: Message Subject: FW: Darrell Scott testimony DARRELL SCOTT TESTIMONYGuess our national leaders didn't expect this, hmm? On Thursday, DarrellScott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine High Schoolshootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the HouseJudiciary Committee's subcommittee What he said to our national leadersduring this special session of Congress was painfully truthful. Theywerenot prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needsto be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, everysociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! Thesecourageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, anddeeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voicecrying in the wilderness. The following is a portion of the transcript:"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good evil in the heartsof men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds ofviolence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and thedeaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who diedmustnot be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers."The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abelout in the field. The villain was not the club he used. Neither was itthe NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, andthereason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart."In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at howquickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not amember of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am nothere to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that theyare responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe thatthey need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do withRachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent.I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy-it was aspiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blamelies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame liesbehind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. "I wrote a poemjust four nights ago that expresses my feelings best. This was writtenway before I knew I would be speaking here today:Your laws ignore our deepest needs,Your words are empty air.You've stripped away our heritage,You've outlawed simple prayer.Now gunshots fill our classrooms,And precious children die.You seek for answers everywhere,And ask the question "Why?"You regulate restrictive laws,Through legislative creed.And yet you fail to understand,That God is what we need!"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, soul, andspirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, wecreate a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in andreekhavoc Spiritual presences were present within our educational systemsformost of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began astheological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened tous as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we openthe doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible asColumbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for ascapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass morerestrictivelaws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties.Wedo not need more restrictive laws. "Eric and Dylan would not have beenstopped by metal detectors No amount of gun laws can stop someone whospends months planning this type of massacre. The real vi llain lieswithin our own hearts."As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw histwo friends murdered before his very eyes-He did not hesitate to pray inschool. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challengeevery young person in America, and around the world, to realize that onApril 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to ourschools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be invain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard forlegislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him.To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA - I give to you asincere challenge. Dare to examine your own heart before casting thefirst stone!My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this countrywill not
Re: New battery technology
- Original Message - From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 3:21 AM Subject: Re: New battery technology Batteries are not a source of energy. True, some energy is recovered from regenerative breaking, but transportation is only about 1/3 of the energy expenditure of the US, and the US expends only about 1/4 the world energy. Effective batteries do not solve the energy problem, even if they are cheap, light, and rechargeable without a water cooling supply in the charge connector. We still need PAGD powered cars that will recharge the batteries on the fly and not draw power from our other sources. So far I can't do it, the Correas won't do it, and I don't know of anyone else trying.
Re: New battery technology
It's not vaporized batteries we need to worry about, it is the power grid and generating stations. The combined output of all of our automotive engines may be more than the combined output of all our generating facilities. We can't replace the nations automotive power by tapping our electric supply. We simply don't have enough. Jeff - Original Message - From: Mike Carrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:17 PM Subject: Re: New battery technology Jed made some good comments: Mike Carrell wrote: delivered to the battery in 1/12 hour, at a rate of (75)(12) = 900 kW, which will vaporize the battery. Obviously if these batteries can charge 10 times faster than normal batteries, as advertised, they must be remarkably efficient so they do not produce much waste heat. MC: That doesn't follow. Fast charging batteries requires monitoring of the charge state so as not to over charge, with drastic effects on the batery chemistry. The Toshiba design, with management circuits, may allow faster charging, but you are still doing work against chemical and other losses. My lithium ion camera batteries take many hours on trickle charge, and about three hours with a fast charger, so 10% is 30 minutes, not five. In principle, it may be possible to dissipate the waste heat, but don't count on it. 900,000 watts is a lot of power. Realize that power will be delivered at 12 V intially, but more like 48 volts for advanced electric automobiles -- it's still 18,750 amps. Most of the 900 kW would convert directly into electric potential, and only about 90 kW converting to heat. That's pretty hot, but with a good radiator and exhaust fan it would not vaporize the battery or cause a fire. With a lead-acid battery, which is 70% efficient, it would produce 200 or 300 kW, which *would* cause a fire. MC: Even with Jed's optimistic number, that's 90 radiant bathroom heaters in your car. Designing the heat dissipation system for that is no easy task. MC: Think about this carefully, and multiply by 10 cars at a time. Ot think about it in a remote rural station on the road from nowhere to nowhere else. Ah, but imagine the rural station equipped with buffer battery of batteries (BBB). Let's say enough to charge 5 cars. This would smooth out the flow and allow a reasonably small main electric feed. A huge charging station on a major highway with 20 charge bay slots might require a BBB large enough to hold a charge for ~100 cars, and an electric power main large enough to recharge the BBB in 2 or 3 hours. It would not need power mains capable of charging all 20 slots simultaneously. MC: Ah so, but no matter how you sturcture it, it is a massive problem. Just as the expressway gas station has big storage tanks, fed by tanker trucks, one can postulate big battery piles. After a while, it begins to look like an electrified railway system. snip The Toshiba site describes hybrid engine applications: The new battery can quickly store energy produced by locomotives and automobiles. This speedy and highly effective recharge characteristic of the battery will support CO2 reduction, as the battery can save and re-use energy that was simply wasted before. MC: It sounds good, and a valuable contribution to the transition to another energy structure. Mike Carrell
Re: Curing ourselves of the itch
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 11:23 AM Subject: OT: Curing ourselves of the itch I also realize I'm in danger of greatly offending certain Vortexians by my personal attempt to associate fundamentally held religious beliefs to the despicable actions of the Nazis. Never the less, I stand by my observations. You are not held at gun point by me to accept anything I say, as a Nazi would do. I never initiate a religious subject here although I have been prompted by the What's New articles. I have a responsibility to God and my fellow man to say what I say. I have at this point fulfilled that responsibility in this forum. If we are all sleeping in a building that has caught fire and I wake up first, should I run out in silence or wake you also? Even if the fire is later thought by you to be of no consequence, was I wrong to wake you? Jeff
Re: [OT] Re: Easter
I can't claim to speak for Mr. Macauley, who is perhaps more clear in his position than I have been, but for myself, proclaiming the deity of Christ is essential to the faith. Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him will I confess before My Father who is in heaven. But, whoever denies Me before men, him will I also deny before My Father who is in heaven. Matt. 10:32-33 - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 12:27 AM Subject: [OT] Re: Easter What compels you to do this? --- RC Macaulay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I confess that Jesus has come in the flesh, __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: OT: The will of God (key points and loose ends)
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:19 PM Subject: Re: OT: The will of God Lucifer is, of course, not exactly big on humankind -- according to the Testament of Moses he is horribly jealous of Adam's place in the universe and hence detests all humans. It is Lucifer's goal to destroy the human race. To do this he must separate us from our Creator God and must prevent our reconciliation with God by discrediting our our only means of reconciliation, Jesus Christ, God the Son. To do that he must prevent or destroy our faith. Jesus, the myth, can't save you. Jesus, the good man, can't save you. Jesus, the teacher, can't save you. Jesus, the prophet, can't save you. Only Jesus, God in the flesh, has the power to save you, and then only if you truly believe He is who He said He was. One of Lucifer's two most successful strategies is to start false religions. He's been doing it for thousands of years and it is still happening today. Some exclude Jesus entirely, but the exclusion of Jesus is not necessary. Just portray Jesus as less than God and the scam is a success. The other key strategy is to convince humans that he (Lucifer) doesn't even exist. We wouldn't be on guard against someone who does not exist, would we? Jeff
Re: Correa
Hey Chris, If you want to give me a call, I'll tell you about all the stuff I tried that didn't work. 610 582 1694 Jeff
attachments
Can I get a scanned diagram to go thru Vortex-l as an attachment. As I recall photos won't go. Jeff
Re: Correa, etc.
In all the written info from the Correas, I never saw a mention of whether they were going for a forward pulse or a reverse pulse or both. With all due respect to Mike, the Correas never proved that OU performance cannot be done with a proper capacitor circuit. Your idea of using a pulse transformer to get reasonable voltages may have merrit, but I suspect that the accompanying inductive reactance may be counterproductive. Large capacitors like 5600mfd @350vdc are $60 to $75 ea. So , get ready to spend a little money. You will also need ballast resistors ranging from 100 to 5000 ohm in order to see the full range of the phenomena. The 100 ohm will need to be 250 watt min. In general I found that the rate of PAGD events is controlled by the ballast resistor value and the intensity of the event is controlled by capacitance across the tube. This parallel capacitance cannot be electrolytic ( electrolytics burn up) and must be relatively small. I have tried values from 1 to 88 mfd. I call this capacitor the initiator. The Correas do not use this circuit element. While capturing rapid fire pulses with my caps and light bulbs did not show any sign of over unity, I did do some single pulse experiments two years ago that at first looked promising. I was set up to capture a forward pulse with a 3mfd initiator cap and a fairly high ballast resistor. I noted the voltage on the filter caps of my power supply and then switched off the 110vac. I then powered up the circuit. A moment later I would get a single PAGD event and then I would immediately shut off the circuit and read the voltage increase of the pulse capture cap, and then read the voltage loss of the power supply filter caps. I then did energy gain/loss calculations and often found the energy gain of the capture cap to be more than the energy loss of the power supply filter caps by as much as 11%. This didn't really prove anything since these results were within the capacitance tolerances of the caps. But, like I said, these positive results did not hold up during rapid fire operation. I firmly believe that Paulo Correa is a truly brilliant person. He has called me a buffoon. Perhaps he is correct in that judgement. But, I like to think that what I lack in genius I make up for in common sense. Jeff - Original Message - From: Zell, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 9:42 AM Subject: RE: Correa, etc. I respect your opinion and have spent considerable time analysing the patents and related comments by Aspden. There is a need to make the PAGD practical - huge banks of batteries aren't going to do it. I think we need To look at pulse transformers to bring the voltages down to more useable levels. I e-mailed the Correas and received a reply that I interpret as meaning that no one has replicated their Results - at least, in any open, published fashion. A sad matter that requires some attention in regard to the Correas' work concerns their unusual state of Mind. To put it simply in a nutshell they are far too contentious about their work. I have no Doubt that they will never achieve any practical commercial application of any of their fascinating research. Like it or not, technology is a human enterprise - with all the social obstacles that entails. It's really Too bad but much the same happened to Tesla in his latter years. I wish things were different. They should Take things in stride, accept that other people make mistakes and don't 'get it', without a lot of patience and help. Maybe that's for the best - they will never meet the same suspicious fate as Mallove or Paul Brown. I say the above also because their attitude of contention becomes infectious - and that inhibits the benefit that they sincerely Wish to promulgate. One of the wisest proverbs I ever heard is this: Fashion is made by fools - but only fools defy fashion. Reich had some brilliant insights but I would never Recommend his personality to others. -Original Message- From: Mike Carrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 9:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Correa, etc. - Original Message - From: Zell, Chris To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 5:25 PM Subject: RE: Correa, etc. How did you handle capturing the pulses? Batteries? MC: Chris, if you are asking this question you are in no position to attempt the Correa PAGD experiments. You need to obtain the relevant patents and study them thoroughly, and then do your best to duplicate exactly what is in them. Don't try to be different, or 'improve' on what is disclosed. Jeff made a sincere effort, saw many effects, but not the key PAGD OU discharge. I wrote about this for IE some years ago. Mike Carrell From: revtec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 5:26 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Correa
Way off topic Fw: CAB RIDE
CAB RIDE Twenty years ago, I drove a cab for a living. When I arrived at 2:30 a.m., the building was dark except for a single light in a ground floor window. Under these circumstances, many drivers would just honk once or twice, wait a minute, then drive away. But, I had seen too many impoverished people who depended on taxis as their only means of transportation. Unless a situation smelled of danger, I always went to the door. This passenger might be someone who needs my assistance, I reasoned to myself. So I walked to the door and knocked. Just a minute, answered a frail, elderly voice. I could hear something being dragged across the floor. After a long pause, the door opened. A small woman in her 80's stood before me. She was wearing a print dress and a pillbox hat with a veil pinned on it, like somebody out of a 1940s movie. By her side was a small nylon suitcase. The apartment looked as if no one had lived in it for years. All the furniture was covered with sheets. There were no clocks on the walls, no knickknacks or utensils on the counters. In the corner was a cardboard box filled with photos and glassware. Would you carry my bag out to the car? she said. I took the suitcase to the cab, then returned to assist the woman. She took my arm and we walked slowly toward the curb. She kept thanking me for my kindness. It's nothing, I told her. I just try to treat my passengers the way I would want my mother treated. Oh, you're such a good boy, she said. When we got in the cab, she gave me an address, then asked, Could you drive through downtown? It's not the shortest way, I answered quickly. Oh, I don't mind, she said. I'm in no hurry. I'm on my way to a hospice. I looked in the rear-view mirror. Her eyes were glistening. I don't have any family left, she continued. The doctor says I don't have very long. I quietly reached over and shut off the meter. What route would you like me to take? I asked. For the next two hours, we drove through the city. She showed me the building where she had once worked as an elevator operator. We drove through the neighborhood where she and her husband had lived when they were newlyweds. She had me pull up in front of a furniture warehouse that had once been a ballroom where she had gone dancing as a girl. Sometimes she'd ask me to slow in front of a particular building or corner and would sit staring into the darkness, saying nothing. As the first hint of sun was creasing the horizon, she suddenly said, I'm tired. Let's go now. We drove in silence to the address she had given me. It was a low building, like a small convalescent home, with a driveway that passed under a portico. Two orderlies came out to the cab as soon as we pulled up. They were solicitous and intent, watching her every move. They must have been expecting her. I opened the trunk and took the small suitcase to the door. The woman was already seated in a wheelchair. How much do I owe you? she asked, reaching into her purse. Nothing, I said. You have to make a living, she answered. There are other passengers, I responded. Almost without thinking, I bent and gave her a hug. She held onto me tightly. You gave an old woman a little moment of joy, she said. Thank you. I squeezed her hand, then walked into the dim morning light. Behind me, a door shut. It was the sound of the closing of a life. I didn't pick up any more passengers that shift. I drove aimlessly lost in thought. For the rest of that day, I could hardly talk. What if that woman had gotten an angry driver, or one who was impatient to end his shift? What if I had refused to take the run, or had honked once, then driven away? On a quick review, I don't think that I have done anything more important in my life. We're conditioned to think that our lives revolve around great moments. But great moments often catch us unaware - beautifully wrapped in what others may consider a small one. PEOPLE MAY NOT REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID, OR WHAT YOU SAID, ~BUT ~ THEY WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER HOW YOU MADE THEM FEEL. Ten things God won't ask: 1...God won't ask what kind of car you drove; He'll ask how many people you drove who didn't have transportation. 2...God won't ask the square footage of your house, He'll ask how many people you welcomed into your home. 3...God won't ask about the clothes you had in your closet, He'll ask how many you helped to clothe. 4...God won't ask what your highest salary was, He'll ask if you compromised your character to obtain it. 5...God won't ask what your job title was, He'll ask if you performed your job to the best of your ability. 6...God won't ask how many friends you had, He'll ask how many
Re: Correa
I don't know anything about electrochemistry in batteries, but I question the ability of a string cells to absorb a fast high energy pulse without impedance, and that this impedence would cause a voltage spike. Maybe the spike has a different contour than a cap has and that makes the difference. I don't know. What I do know is that if you run the tube with only a ballast resistor, the PAGD events are merely a random display of little sparkles on the surface of the cathode, and that a series connected diode cap combination across the the tube to capture a forward pulse will collect nothing. But, if you put a 3 mfd cap across the tube, the sparkles turn into energetic eruptions on the cathode surface causing the capture capto charge up to 800v in successive pulses. (I accidently pushed a series combination of 350v electrolytic capture caps to 800v and got away with it) My tube is a pair of 3/4 inch aluminum plates separated be a 12 inch dia by 3 in pyrex tube sealed with a 12 inch dia by 3/16 O ring and vac grease. One plate is drilled for a vac connection. I also have a 9 inch dia version using an acrylic tube. It works just as well. Works is a relative term. Lots of neat visual effects: no obvious OU. As you pull a vacuum while the tube is energized, you reach a vacuum threshold where the tube lights off. Maximum activity is not terribly far below this threshold. If you pull a much harder vacuum then the reactions get lethargic. The geometry of my tubes allows me to see a haze line in the lavender glow of the tube. This line may not be visible in a Correa style tube. Best performance of my equipmentis at a haze line height of 5/8 to 3/4 inch above the cathode plate. At light off the haze line is at 1/8 to1/4 inch above the cathode. Jeff - Original Message - From: Zell, Chris To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 5:25 PM Subject: Re: Correa Now we're getting somewhere! Perhaps a huge part of this mystery concerns the critical design of the output. Too small a capacitor and the pulse action will be inhibited because the capacitor will be filled. Too fast or brief a pulse and the battery may reject most of it as heat rather than accept it as a charge. It might be possible to use some sort of audio transformer of high quality to transform the pulses down. I would think the low impedance of a small battery pack would be reflected back into the tube favorably. Perhaps one of the new low voltage ultracaps would work in such a circuit.
Re: Correa, etc.
I capturedforward pulses in up to six 5600 mfd 350v caps in parallel. I kept these from over charging with a load bank of series/parallel 40 watt bulbs that I switched in and out as needed to limit maximum voltage. Reverse pulses could easily reach 700v which is well above my 600vdc supply even though there is no inductor in the circuit. I also have a clip on ammeter on the 120vac power cord. This crude arrangement could only identify massive OU performance if it was factor of two or more. Reverse pulses are much rarer. You will need two 350v caps in series to capture them. Jeff - Original Message - From: Zell, Chris To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 5:25 PM Subject: RE: Correa, etc. How did you handle capturing the pulses? Batteries? From: revtec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 5:26 PMTo: vortex-l@eskimo.comSubject: Re: Correa, etc. I have been doing PAGD experiments off and on since 1996. I saw a lot of interesting things in the tube, and captured energy pulses on diode/capacitor circuits, but over unity eludes me. Keith Nagle posted some pictures of my apparatus on his web site. They may still be there. It was a whole lot of fun working with this phenomena. I hope you try it and let us know what you find. Jeff Fink - Original Message - From: Zell, Chris To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 4:31 PM Subject: Correa, etc. Has anybody replicated any of Correa's PAGD overunity claims? I got a vacuum pump and other gear in hopes of building something that apparently nobody is pursuing. (???) On a separate note, I just got done reading "Confessions of an Economic Hitman". It is an astounding book. I have little doubt that anyone who stands in the way of our oil based economic order could be killed. If you have serious free energy findings, please be careful. You could end up like Mallove , whatever his flaws.
Re: Evangelical environmentalists
- Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2005 11:34 PM Subject: Re: Evangelical environmentalists - Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2005 5:57 PM Subject: Re: Evangelical environmentalists If the Bible is literal truth of the physical reality, then the writers at that time would have had to be given knowledge about how the world was created and what would happen in the future that no normal man could have at that time. Instead, the Bible contains conflicting statements, allegorical descriptions of creation, and predictions of the future that can be related to events only after the fact. Two hundred years before king Cyrus of Persia was born, the prophet Isaiah foretold by name (44:28 - 45:7) that Cyrus would be the one to release the Jews from Babylonian captivity in 522 BC. The prophet Micah, writing around 700 BC wrote in (5:3) about the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem. When the wise men arrived at Herod's palace the scribes looked it up and told them where to find Him! King David in Psalm 22 wrote a description of Christ's crucifiction over 1000 years before it happened. Jesus, when asked to comment on the splendor of the Jewish temple, said not one stone shall be left here upon another that shall not be thrown down. This was said on Tuesday, three days before His crucifiction, and is recorded in three of the four gospels. Thirty some years later Titus of Rome made it happen. Jerusalem was leveled, The Jewish inhabitants were relocated, and the nation of Israel was no more. For the next twenty centuries, scholars, studying the Hebrew texts and the writings of the apostles, both of which would form the canon of scriptures known today as the Bible, would be perplexed at all the prophetic statements regarding the restored nation of Israel. It was perfectly clear that the nation of Israel was destroyed beyond any hope of restoration. That certainty was proof for centuries, to many people, that the Bible was erroneous and unreliable. But, the unimaginable happened on May 18, 1948 and Israel was once again established as a nation. The nearly extinct Hebrew language is once again spoken in the land. Ironically, the language of the empire that tried to destroy the Jews is spoken nowhere! I was born on the same day Israel was reborn. There is surely nothing prophetic in that, but it is a curious thing. Jeff Consequently, no evidence exists within the text that the knowledge base of the writers was beyond what was known or imagined at the time. As a result, the Bible as the literal word of God has to be taken on faith. The conflict with science occurs because science attempts to take nothing on faith. This is why science and religion can never agree. Regards, Ed What are scientists to make of statements given by religion based on such evidence? This is rather like assuming the works of Aristotle are literally true and should be the basis for science. How do Christian scientists deal with this problem?
Re: Evangelical environmentalists
I think I have recognized three or four Bible believing Christians on Vortex who are regular contributors and CF advocates including myself. I'm surprised you missed it. The range in attitude toward the environment among Christians is probably little different than that of the general population. There is abig difference between Bible believing Christiansand church goers who are skeptical of most of the book of Genesis. I have heard it said that going to church does't make you a Christian any more than going to McDonald's makes you a hamburger. But, that's another issue. The truth is,most church goers don't know what they believe. Nonbelievers and evolutionists believe that humans are a product of the earth and that we owe the earth something as if it is "mother" earth and "mother" nature. Bible believing Christians OTOH believe that the earth was made for us, not the other way around, and thatitsresources were put here by God for our use. That does not imply that we can do anything we want with it. The Bible challenges us to be good stewards, which means to use those resources wisely and not be wasteful. I think that makes Bible believing Christians common sense environmentalists rather than rabid environmentalists, and thus they would be very reasonable people for you to address. Jeff - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com ; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 10:46 AM Subject: Re: Evangelical environmentalists [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I posted on this issue earlier. A useful link is:http://www.creationcare.org/Hey, Erik. Do you know how to talk to these people, by any chance? Do you speak their lingo? If so, please introduce this subject to them. Have them read my book. The last chapters may speak to some of their concerns.Seriously, these people's beliefs and thought processes are so different from mine, I have no clue how I might persuade them to look at cold fusion. There is a very nice fellow promoting my book with some of them. He happens to be a rabid creationist. I copied one of his letters to Ed Storms the other day, and we agree that he is mentally on a different planet. I would not want to get into an argument with him. I sincerely appreciate his concern for the environment and his efforts to promote cold fusion. I am always willing to compromise and find common ground with other people. But I do not know how to write a presentation that might convince someone with this belief system.Seriously, I would appreciate advice from any other readers here with connections or a religious bent. No offense meant.- Jed
Re: Evangelical environmentalists
- Original Message - From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2005 5:57 PM Subject: Re: Evangelical environmentalists revtec wrote: I'm all for sound science including CF research. I have spent hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars trying to coax some over unity performance out of a series of PAGD experiments, but only succeeded in finding some interesting anomalies. A little elaboration here: I havn't fired up the PAGD apparatus since last April, because I was running out of reasonable circuit variations to try. Even though I have an Aerospace degree, I in no way consider myself a scientist. Mike Carrell observed my early efforts in 1996 and referred to me as a tinkerer in a later post. That may be an accurate assessment of my capability. I remain strongly convinced that true religion and true science are never in conflict. Well Jeff, I agree. However I would phrase this a little differently. I would say that a true understanding of science is never in conflict with a true understanding of the spirit reality. The word Religion should not be used in this context because it is only an imperfect effort by man to understand the spirit reality, much like physics is an imperfect effort by man to understand the physical world. Both fields of study are fractured into warring factions because they are based on an imperfect understanding. I really don't like the word religion, but I use it because that is the word most people expect to see. Religions in general are man's attempts at reaching out to God. Christianity, however, is God reaching out to man. This raises an additional issue with respect to the literal interpretation of the Bible. Some people argue that the statements in the Bible are exactly true even though they were made by men writing in another language, who believed the earth was flat and was the center of the only universe, and who were talking to an entirely different culture. I have read the Bible cover to cover several times but have not encountered in my recollection a verse implying that the earth was flat. I could have missed it. Do you have a reference? There are cases in the Bible where the author accurately reports a statement which is untrue. As an example, the scriptures state in many places that there is life after death, but in the book of Ecclesiastes, Solomon says there is not. That is what he thought at the time he wrote it, and that thought is accurately reported. But, it is fairly clear to me that he was nuts at the time he wrote it. If you had 500 wives, how sane would you be? Nevertheless, God is supposed to have given these men superhuman and universal knowledge, evidence for which is not obvious in the text. I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Jeff What are scientists to make of statements given by religion based on such evidence? This is rather like assuming the works of Aristotle are literally true and should be the basis for science. How do Christian scientists deal with this problem?
Re: It is worse because it works better
Ten years ago I owned an Avid Flyer, it's like a Kit Fox. I suffered a catastrophic engine failure 400 feet in the air during a takeoff. The motality rate for that kind of incident is really high, but I managed to bring it back to the runway and land it without causing further damage. A few years later while on landing approach in a Cherokee 235 I hit a buzzard. He mangled my left wing as I cut him in half. I completed the landing successfully. My daughter, also a pilot, was with me. As we got out of the plane, she said Way to go dad, you kept flying the airplane ( as opposed to panicing). I think I'm a pretty good pilot when the chips are down. I attribute that to being one with the machine. I feel it . It is an extension of my body. Now, consider those fantastically awsome flight simulators we have all played on our computers. I think they are really cool, but I can't have any fun with them because I crash all the time. I look like a total bozo. If you ever saw me do one of those you would never fly with me. The trouble is: I can't feel anything. The visual inputs are not enough for me. Maybe it's not that bad for most people, but it sure is tough for me. Jeff - Original Message - From: Steven Krivit [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 8:59 PM Subject: Re: It is worse because it works better It turned out they literally flew by the seat of their pants. That's profound! s
Re: SOLVING REALLY BIG PROBLEMS
- Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Bob Flower [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andy Becan [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 7:57 PM Subject: Re: SOLVING REALLY BIG PROBLEMS --- revtec wrote: Perhaps the reduction in CO2 emissions will be more than offset by the waste heat output of billions of CF engines, and that global warming will accelerate by direct heating alone! Could it be that with perfecting CF we are about to open pandora's box? I brought this up before without getting a single comment. Did I have silent agreement with this concern from most of the group, or am I considered totally nuts Not sure what you are referring to specifically, but back in April when I brought up the subject of thermal pollution in a long post to vortex, I believe it was you (or someone using the name revtec) who commented, I personally believe that we are overrating our ability to thermally affect this planet, and that the earth is thermally self regulating to a much greater degree than we give it credit for. Do I take it that you are now coming around to getting a proper understanding of the issue of thermal pollution, and now chiding others for following your previous advice? Jones No. I still believe the Earth has a propensity for self regulation. But if human activity manages to push the planet beyond the control limits a concerned God can make further adjustments. Jeff
Re: Will future war be fought over energy?
All James Bond movies are full of technically preposterous nonsense. I considered contacting the people making the James Bond movies to make them aware of the devices I produce for a living, since my stuff would make a great prop for their movie, and it's real. But, as I understand the system, they would want me to pay since it is a form of advertizing. I have been on vortex from 1996 and have neverstated what I do. Forgive me for mentioning my company this once. www.stopthecrime.com
Re: Young Earth Evidence: was Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005
- Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 1:55 AM Subject: Re: Young Earth Evidence: was Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005 The age of the Earth debate began with much shorter time scales. Although Niagara Falls was not featured in the initial debate I think it is good to consider because the history of the falls is only about twice as old as biblical creation. The river flows over an escapement with harder rock on top and a softer rock underneath. The water erodes the softer rock collapsing the top rock, so the edge of the falls gradually moves up stream. Geologists estimate the falls started 7 miles downstream, 12,000 years ago. I suspect that the estimate is based on an assumption that the flow rate over the falls has been historically equal to what is is now. If the flow rate was higher, then the erosion rate would be faster. Furthermore, erosion rates are not proportional to flow rates. To figure erosion rates to be proportional to the square of the flow rate is probably a more accurate assessment. With this proportionality, erosion rates based on a continuous average flow rate would be way less than what it would be with alternating periods of extreme drought and extreme flood. High flood rates beyond our paltry 250 yr historical records of observation for Niagra could be a major factor in over estimating the required time. Jeff
Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005
I believe in variation and natural selection within the constraints that we see it happen. I am quite content to have someone label biblical creation as also a theory since no one seems able to prove that scientificly either. Biblical creation requires almost as much faith as evolution. Darwin never touched the question of origin. He left that extrapolation entirely to our imaginations! Jeff - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 3:54 PM Subject: Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005 The idea of evolution predates Darwin by several decades, if not more. Darwin provided a particular _explanation_ of evolution: descent through variation and natural selection. There are alternative non-biblical explanations of evolution. Darwin's explanation currently dominates science and science education, but I doubt it is sufficient. It is fair to portray Darwin's explanation of evolution as a theory, but I think it invites the closure of minds to portray evolution as just a theory. Should we say biblical creationism is just a theory? Harry revtec at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Akira Kawasaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 4:30 PM Subject: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005 3. CREATIONISM: COURT ORDERS WARNING STICKERS REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. While I am not suprised by this ruling, I am certainly dismayed. Darwin himself referred to his work as theory on pages 205, 206, 209, 211, 218, 219, 229, 230, 233, 292, 313, 309, 316, 323, 339, 341 and 343 of the paper back as well as other places. It has been called the theory of evolution for over 100 years! Until the last decade or so the word theory was prominently connected to the word evolution. This forces me to ask What blazing discovery of the past ten years has propelled the theory of evolution into the relm of indisputable fact?. On the contrary, recent discoveries, and the lack thereof, have, if anything, cast more doubt than confirmation on the theory! On page 222 Darwin admits to grave cases of difficulty, some of which will be discussed in my future work. He never produced a future work! Jeff Fink The constitutionality of a creationist message got a court test. You will recall that in Cobb County, GA, stickers were placed on high school biology texts warning that evolution is a theory, not a fact http://www.aps.org/WN/WN04/wn111204.cfm. Yesterday, in ordering the stickers removed, a federal judge said the stickers convey an impermissible message of endorsement.
Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005
- Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 6:35 PM Subject: Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, January 14, 2005 revtec at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe in variation and natural selection within the constraints that we see it happen. I am quite content to have someone label biblical creation as also a theory since no one seems able to prove that scientificly either. Biblical creation requires almost as much faith as evolution. Darwin never touched the question of origin. He left that extrapolation entirely to our imaginations! Agreed, but what do you mean by the question of origin? Darwin did touch on the ancestry of man and many other animals. In particular he argued man and ape evolved from a common ancestor. Hence the title of his work -- The Origin of Species. Darwin quit at postulating common ancestry without addressing the origin of life in its most basic form. In a previous thread, we hit on the difficulties of having matter mixtures within the universe self oganizing to the fantastic degree of forming a living cell, which implies the necessity of intelligent design input to make it happen. At another level we have what is termed the Cambrian explosion where a myriad of strange creatures come into existance at once with no trace of ancestors in the underlying rock strata. This is one of the great difficulties Darwin wrestled with. He tries to explain this problem away, but it sure resembles an act of creation to me. And, then you have the career ending level of origin, where God told Moses how he did it and Moses wrote it down as the first chapters of Genesis. If you want to be considered a scientist today, and you imagine a different origin of man, you dare not express it or you will be branded a simpleton or a quack. Are you saying that the scientific establishment allows a scientist to attend church so long as he/she does not believe the first chapters of the Bible? I'm thankful that I am not beholden to the scientific community. They don't sign my pay check and they never will. If the first part of the Bible is a fairy tale, then, how far into it does the truth start? If the first part is a lie, then, the rest can't be trusted either. The whole thing should be dumped in the trash and one should sleep in on a Sunday morning. The Bible is either the word of God or it isn't. It's all or nothing for me. Anything else is hypocritical. My bottom line is that the Bible makes more sense to me than Darwinism. Jeff
Re: More on Crookes radiometer
What do you think would happen if I put a set of radiometer paddles in my PAGD tube and fire it up? Jeff
Re: intelligent design
I think you coined a new term. For computers of that speed and complexity they should call it "siftware". Regarding the question of whether modern man is more or less physically advanced than his ancestors, we must factor in technology,our recent knowledge of nutrition, and recent access to a variety of good food. We may only appear to be more robust than our ancestors.If these recentdevelopments are factored in, we may find that we are devolving rather than evolving, and that the gene pool in general is in regression. Jeff - Original Message - From: RC Macaulay To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 11:37 PM Subject: Re: intelligent design I have seldom enjoyed a discussion like this thread has produced. Computers There is an effort underway to produce a system of "quadratic computing" that will be the step beyond parallel computing. The complexities of writing the siftware may seem impossible to overcome.. BUT.. they will be overcome. Quadratic computing will address the needs of future mathematics. Evolution evidence of the past demonstrate humankind had a higher level of intelligence than we offer in Hollywood movies of " cavemen". Man went into caves later.. they didn't come out of caves later. Man wasn't degenerate in early times, neither were they neanderthals. Richard Blank Bkgrd.gif
Re: WHAT'S NEW Monday, Jan 03 05
It seems that we have come back to Intelligent Design because the universe, as presently described by scientists, is still too small and too young to produce the complexity of a living cell by random processes. If Darwin would have had access to thefindings of molecular biology and probability mathamatics that we have available today, do you think he would havegiven serious thought towriting such a book as "Origin of the Species"? Darwin himself stated, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." Jeff
Re: WashingtonPost article
- Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 6:17 PM Subject: WashingtonPost article The cold fusion guys can't brew a cup of tea, Cold fusion researchers may measure their net gains in milliwatts, but the hot fusioneers measure their net losses in megawatts! So, who's really closer to success? Jeff
Re: SHC
These are the observations I recall: 1. The pig was on a large metal tray to retain the juices in the immediate area and to prevent the fire from spreading across the floor of the room. 2. There was some fabric placed over the pig to supply wicking. 3. An accelerant was used to kick things off. 4. The fire was never intense enough to spread to the ceiling. 5. Some torso bones did burn to ash. 6. The extremeties were largely intact at the conclusion of the fire. Jeff - Original Message - From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:00 PM Subject: Re: SHC At 7:21 AM 11/16/4, revtec wrote: - Original Message - From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 3:54 AM Subject: SHC If wicking is actually a valid explanation for spontaneous human combustion, then an experiment should produce similar results using a large ham with bone and skin. This was already done using a whole pig on a TV show on Discovery. The result appeared successful. By what criterea? Regards, Horace Heffner
Re: Episode 2: Joy of discussion
- Original Message - From: RC Macaulay To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 8:57 AM Subject: Episode 2: Joy of discussion Did it ever occur to anyone here that the Grand Canyon is shaped entirely wrong for a geological feature that is millions of years old, that the outer canyon walls are too steep, and the debris field is too small? If the canyon was formed over millions of years, the seasonal changes with countless freezing and thawing cycles should have fractured and collapsed all vertical walls on a continuous basis so that the canyon would be a large V shaped valley composed of rock rubble at approximately 45 degree angle of repose. Canyon De Chelly, 150 mi east of the Grand Canyon is an even more extreme example of this delema. Sheer vertical walls extend from top to bottom with no rubble whatsoever. The stream that runs through it can be crossed on foot without getting your ankles wet. De Chelly can barely be thousands of years old. I have been to the base of El Capitan in Yosemite; the rubble at its base is unimpressive in size. The rubble at the base of Devil Tower likewise seems insufficient for a millions year old geologic feature. On July 13 1993 my wife and I were at Capital Reefs national park. We were in a vertical walled canyon near the trail head to Cassidy Arch. It was nearing sunset and windy. We had back packs and intended to climb to Cassidy Arch and spend the night. While contemplating the wisdom of this idea, I was staring at the far canyon wall. Suddenly, tons of the canyon ledge fell away right before my eyes! Half way down, the rock fall struck the canyon wall, shattering into a rain of fragments, and leaving a white mark on the wall. As I scanned the far wall I noticed numerous white marks. Yet. the rubble field was not ofimpressive size. If the canyon in Capital Reef is another Millions year old feature, what is the chance that I would see a major rock fall during my 2 minutes of contemplation? We decided to spend our 25th wedding anniversary in a motel. When I was a kid a local business backfilled an area to extend a parking lot. They used ash from a coal fired power station to fill the area to over 10 ft deep. At some time later a 15 minute thunder storm cut a8 ft deep canyon through the semistable ash. I walked through the canyon an hour later. It was astounding! All of the features that make the Grand Canyon instantly recognizable to anybody were laid out before my eyes in miniature with walls as high as I could reach. When Mt St Helen exploded it generated a flood of mud and ash that formed a canyon system out of the Touttle river basin complete with vertical walls of visibly layered rock all formed from mud and ash. If you were to blind fold a geologistandtransport himto the Touttle canyon he would never guess that he was inspecting a geologic feature only 25 years old. This Vortex-L group knows better than anyone that a reputable scientist can loose a lucrative careerby publically believing CF to be possible. How much more a geologist or paleontologist who gives credence to young earth evidence! How many important discoveries and artifacts have been destroyed, reburied, or "filed" into oblivion in the basement of some museum to perpetuate the old earth dogma, but primarily to protect ones paycheck? We of all people know it must be happening. I'm just getting started, but I will quit for now. Richard is right. Let's cut the bull and get to some real science. Jeff Fink P.E. Answer for Wyley..I came from the old days when dinasaurs were made into crude petroleum beneath the earth.. everyone accepted the fact back then.. well.. err.. that is until I saw the Grand Canyon and read the plaque provided by the US Park Service that stated it took umpeen million years for the river to carve a canyon 20 miles wide and a mile deep. From there I traveled to White Sands to read another plaque stating ...the sands were millions of years old andtraveled x inches per year and the sands had drifted 40 miles after the gypsum had leached from the adjacent mountain. Hmmm... I was viewing a giant hourglass,,, inches per year times miles roughly equaled 6000 to 12000 years,, not millions of years. Meanwhile , back at the ranch, my experience with liquids contol systems and cavitation gave me pause when attempting to reconcile a cavitation cut 20 miles wide and a mile deep in just under.. say 120 millions years. A few years ago the Hoover Dam bypass valves were opened against warnings by people that know better. The damage done in a fewhours bycavitation demonstrated how to cut concrete pipe without using a saw or spend 30 million years to wear it down. A rather long way around to answering your
