good idea, but bad luck.8(
2012/3/31 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
wrote:
I've often get through this page not reading it, to find the specs...
does anybody remind if the following text is old, or have been
Global warming has become an extremely polarising issue. There are
strong science based arguments on both sides but whichever side you
believe is to some extent a 'faith based' judgement as you can find
contradictory journal papers and analyses on almost every issue (other
than the actual general
polarizing yes
as was saying an economic cronicle journalist on a frenc TV (BFM, N doze),
there are some suject for which it is hard to make your opinion if you have
both vision and no prejudice.
the vision of Judith Corry, ex-IPCC contibutor, traitor, is that
uncertaineties have been ignored to
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 4:09 Samstag, 31.März 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Should there be a prediction market for LENR?
pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
And,
having odds makers following LENR might generate a
Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote:
I am not a republican, and I think global warming is a sham.
I believe you are technically wrong about that. However, it is somewhat off
topic. I think we can agree that cold fusion calorimetry is much easier to
understand than climate science. The
Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote:
Fukishima disaster? How many people died in this disaster? 3 so far, 0
from radiation.
It was more an economic disaster, like Three Mile Island (TMI). TMI nearly
bankrupted the local Pennsylvania power company, and cost billions of
dollars.
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 15:38 Samstag, 31.März 2012
Betreff: [Vo]:The Fukushima disaster
About a trillion dollars, as I said.
Monetizing the issue makes it comparative.
But I doubt that.
No every issue
Regarding the scale of the ecological disaster, my impression is that is so
big that no one has a handle on it. No one knows how much radioactive
material escaped, where it ended up, or how widespread it is. It is much
worse than they originally thought.
Last week they inserted a camera into one
Here are some details about that rough estimate of $1 trillion damage over
the long term.
The immediate aftermath of the entire tsunami disaster was cost roughly
$250 billion, but it will cost a lot more in the future, especially if they
rebuild the towns. I doubt they will rebuild many of them.
Von:Jed Rothwell
jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 17:00 Samstag, 31.März 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:The Fukushima disaster
Jed,
the problem is:
Are there problems who should be adressed as NIL.
In software-speak this has been the
This is nothing new, I am reading Atomic America by Todd tucker. When the
SL-1 reactor went super critical in 1961 the control rod assembly impaled an
army operator and pinned him to the roof of the containment structure. When
they got the body out days later, it was perfectly preserved
Sometimes associated with crop circles, they are actually formed
thanks to natural whirpools.
http://forgetomori.com/2009/science/ice-circles-explained-kind-of/
Really kewl video at the end of the page.
T
Now, I know my technical training and/or terminology needs improving, but I
believe I can adequately describe the 'one' means of technology that is
enabling significantly advanced civilizations to operate and/or exist in the
very space above us, as 'we' go about the business of living (you
A potentially useful hypothesis appeared in 1990 to explain the PF effect,
one of many which are largely forgotten today. There were a number of papers
on a this new bound hydrogen species, called the binuclear atom, authored
by Cerofolini and Para - who moved on to other fields in the mid 90s.
http://pesn.com/2012/03/28/9602066_S_Africa_Company_Discovers_Problems_in_Alpha_Testing_their_Fuel_Free_Generator/
...
On the charging side, we have seen that the batteries are being destructively
charged to the point where after some time they are do not hold charge. This
occurs typically
I cannot help not thinking like George Hodi in this case
2012/3/31 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com
http://pesn.com/2012/03/28/9602066_S_Africa_Company_Discovers_Problems_in_Alpha_Testing_their_Fuel_Free_Generator/
...
On the charging side, we have seen that the batteries are being
Von:pagnu...@htdconnect.com pagnu...@htdconnect.com
An: Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.com
Gesendet: 18:59 Samstag, 31.März 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Should there be a prediction market for LENR?
Guenter,
You are too cynical
no, my dear friend, I'm trying to be a humanist realist.
Cynicism
these guys do not
even pass the smell test.
Same with UFOs.
'Back to the
drawing board' sounds like a good idea.
Next step: the
mental asylum, with a workshop, where all so inclined work on their perpetuum
mobile, along with the other guys, who feel like a reincarnation of Jesus
Christ.
A truly
How many people died when a renewable energy dam broke?
That seldom happens nowadays. Retaining dams made from earth sometimes
break, but not power dams made from concrete.
About 1,000 and probably about the same economic damage with the homes
washed away.
When and where did that
Most of you might have already come across this, but here it goes:
About the future of energy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOMWzjrRiBgfeature=share
How much of the figures are for real? What about the gloomy conclusion?
Regards,
--
Patrick
www.tRacePerfect.com
The daily puzzle everyone
They paint a pretty gloomy picture. The unknown future has always appeared
limited, but somehow we seem to get through it and I think LENR will come to
the rescue this time.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Ellul ellulpatr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent:
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Francis_Dam -- 1929 ?
... the current death toll is estimated to be more than 600 victims . . .
A concrete dam failure of this nature is extremely unlikely today.
I believe dams are the safest and cheapest way to
Nuclear is just as safe, if not more, than both of them.
On Mar 31, 2012, at 8:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Francis_Dam -- 1929 ?
... the current death toll is estimated to be more than 600 victims . . .
A concrete dam
Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote:
Nuclear is just as safe, if not more, than both of them.
Evidently not. The Fukushima accident proved it is not safe. Just because
it did not kill people right away that does not make it safe. It will
likely kill many workers in the years to come.
I agree Jed. The Fukushima accident was extrodinarily bad. It also should
make us understand that we are not capable of anticipating the worst event that
can occur. I suspect that there are scenarios much worse than what actually
happened and thank God that they did not appear.
Energy
Other renewable energy sources will take trillions out of just the U.S. economy
every year because they cost about twice as much as other energy sources. And
your numbers for cost are way too high. It creates jobs by rebuilding lost
homes, etc., thus stimulating the economy according to a lot
LENR notwithstanding as influential in this rejoinder…
Everything is relative. The trillion dollar price tag is a drop in the
bucket for non-carbon based energy; a great bargain in life and treasure
lost. Nuclear disaster is a bargain. This unfortunate incident though
tragic and heart-rending
27 matches
Mail list logo
