And you thought global warming theory was B.S? This is even moreridiculous. Controlling gravity

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:57:25 -0000 (UTC), Mike Collins
wrote:

Possibly. But I was quite impressed by the Cheshire farmer powering his
farm with hydrogen from rainwater.
Cheshire is north of the whole continental US and most inhabitants of
Canada.

I think we'll see all sorts of interesting approaches like this,
mostly on a small scale- individual homes, farms, businesses, and
small communities. It may well produce a significant chunk of the
total energy supply, 5-10% or even more. I think most production will
be split between solar roof power and large power plants of one kind
or another.

On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 3:47:57 PM UTC-6, Mike Collins wrote:

Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 12:34:44 PM UTC-6, Mike Collins wrote:

Not far underground. They put dust in the atmosphere and reduce the
temperature. Nuclear winter in miniature.

Or maybe we could figure out a way to set off volcanoes on the ring of
fire :-)

But using renewables including satellite microwave power is preferable.

Which has all the downside of the mirrors-in-space solution (primarily,
rocket exhaust consisting of nasty chemicals and heat) plus the
downside of adding heat to the environment from the additional energy
captured by the satellites and being sent to earth. Mirrors have the
advantage of either reflecting energy TOWARD or AWAY FROM the earth, as
needed. In addition, people didn't like being irradiated by beam drift

Rectenna farms would be set up to use very low energy microwaves and,
unlike solar farms they could be real farms with crops growing and/or
animals grazing underneath.

Yep, I liked that approach many years ago when it was first proposed, and
it's quite efficient at the ground end.

Even without this energy self sufficiency is possible for some.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36005473

Note the simple storage of solar and wind energy as hydrogen.

About 60% efficiency and then, say, 75% efficiency for an H-turbine,
for an overall efficiency of 45&. Not bad - much better than ground PV.

There's no grassland in orbit.

Ummm, I was referring to ground-based solar.

I'm not sure there is that much ground based solar. Most of the solar power
round here is on rooftops. There is a small solar farm near but it's the
only one in a 20 mile radius as far as I know.
There are huge fields of them in Southern California along I10 between
Mt. San Jacinto and Mt. San Gorgonio. Come to think of it, there seem to
be many more wind farms there, too, as well as in Wyoming, SE Colorado
and Northern California east of the Bay Area.

The problem with natural gas is escaped methane. A very powerful
greenhouse gas.

Quibbles. Easy to fix, just stop raising cows and pigs. Eat broccoli.
Besides:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...anies-38028512

https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/g....html#Reducing

A real worry is that increasing sea temperatures could release methane from
the seabed clathrates.

But;

We need natural gas as a stopgap until there is sufficient nuclear and
renewable available. The British government needs to get on with the
Cardiff tidal power lagoon and maybe the Severn barrage. And we need as
much renewable energy as possible.

Nuclear? I don't think that will happen without a passive failsafe
technology. Did I mention that I had a heart attack the day of the
Fukushima disaster :-)

On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 5:31:25 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 8:46:22 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

When I correctly answered "Shannon" the quiz
question "What is the longest river in the British Isles?" the Irish man on
my team and two Irish men on the opposing team objected saying it should be
the Severn (an English/Welsh river).

How, in the name of all that is good and right , could any person imagine
that the Shannon, a river in the Republic of Ireland, is anything other
than an Irish river !!!!.

The British isles cease to be in 1949 in any and all terms of relevance
even if it is retained as a convenience or an unresolved issue that
doesn't occupy citizens of Britain and Ireland.

This is a simple issue of geography/ politics that really doesn't lend
itself to false answers and likewise in more complicated matters of
astronomy the most basic facts are disputed by what is effectively a cult.

I was going to apply the Japanese soldier syndrome to the other guy alone
but obviously you qualify for the same club.



http://youtu.be/rNu8XDBSn10

This goes way beyond the topic at hand as it is quite a spectacle to see something which is a 100% factual certainty become subject to a falsehood and something I have seen many times in a forum dominated by empiricists and magnification hobbyists.

A person from America or any other country can be forgiven for classing the Western Isles as the British Isles and it is mostly a non issue for British and Irish citizens however this may change if the UK leaves the EU when the dreaded borders may go up distinguishing Britain from Ireland once more.

I am not surprised that you class the Irish Shannon river as part of Britain for the same reason you can't distinguish how relative speeds between the faster moving Earth and the slower moving Jupiter/Saturn infer a heliocentric system and a moving Earth as those planets temporarily fall behind in view -

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap011220.html

Like the Japanese soldier who refused to believe that the war was over, you can't accept that the system on which your convictions are based got it wrong also -

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct,..." Newton

That statement is another bomb going off in astronomy as it misses the point in the major argument which assigns an orbital motion to the Earth as the outer planets fall behind in view as the Earth overtakes them. This is where Royal Society empiricism has brought you, a person who still thinks an Irish river is on Britain and more importantly by far, an inability to affirm what the original heliocentric astronomers saw when they looked out at the planets from a moving Earth.

oriel36 wrote:
On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 5:31:25 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 8:46:22 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

When I correctly answered "Shannon" the quiz
question "What is the longest river in the British Isles?" the Irish man on
my team and two Irish men on the opposing team objected saying it should be
the Severn (an English/Welsh river).

How, in the name of all that is good and right , could any person imagine
that the Shannon, a river in the Republic of Ireland, is anything other
than an Irish river !!!!.

The British isles cease to be in 1949 in any and all terms of relevance
even if it is retained as a convenience or an unresolved issue that
doesn't occupy citizens of Britain and Ireland.

This is a simple issue of geography/ politics that really doesn't lend
itself to false answers and likewise in more complicated matters of
astronomy the most basic facts are disputed by what is effectively a cult.

I was going to apply the Japanese soldier syndrome to the other guy alone
but obviously you qualify for the same club.



http://youtu.be/rNu8XDBSn10

This goes way beyond the topic at hand as it is quite a spectacle to see
something which is a 100% factual certainty become subject to a falsehood
and something I have seen many times in a forum dominated by empiricists
and magnification hobbyists.

A person from America or any other country can be forgiven for classing
the Western Isles as the British Isles and it is mostly a non issue for
British and Irish citizens however this may change if the UK leaves the
EU when the dreaded borders may go up distinguishing Britain from Ireland once more.

I am not surprised that you class the Irish Shannon river as part of
Britain for the same reason you can't distinguish how relative speeds
between the faster moving Earth and the slower moving Jupiter/Saturn
infer a heliocentric system and a moving Earth as those planets
temporarily fall behind in view -

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap011220.html

Like the Japanese soldier who refused to believe that the war was over,
you can't accept that the system on which your convictions are based got it wrong also -

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct,..." Newton

That statement is another bomb going off in astronomy as it misses the
point in the major argument which assigns an orbital motion to the Earth
as the outer planets fall behind in view as the Earth overtakes them.
This is where Royal Society empiricism has brought you, a person who
still thinks an Irish river is on Britain and more importantly by far, an
inability to affirm what the original heliocentric astronomers saw when
they looked out at the planets from a moving Earth.





A typical example of your inability to comprehend facts. The Shannon is not
in the United Kingdom but it is in the British Isles ie that group of
islands which is close to Brittany.

On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 12:21:57 PM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 8:46:22 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

When I correctly answered "Shannon" the quiz
question "What is the longest river in the British Isles?" the Irish man on
my team and two Irish men on the opposing team objected saying it should be
the Severn (an English/Welsh river).

How, in the name of all that is good and right , could any person imagine
that the Shannon, a river in the Republic of Ireland, is anything other than
an Irish river !!!!.

The Irish did not create the River Shannon, although it is -located- on an island called Ireland, where some Irish live. It passes through Northern Ireland where some British live. So it's a British river too, as well as being the longest river in the British Isles.

Some people have both British and Irish citizenship. It's sort of hard to tell just by looking who they are, even on Saint Patrick's Day. Now if you had to choose either Irish or British, but never both, then you would be on a better footing in claiming a more distinct ethnic/national/cultural identity.

Until then, you have no business getting PO'ed at strangers for calling you British, when in fact you so often appear to be just that.

I was going to apply the Japanese soldier syndrome to the other guy alone but obviously you qualify for the same club.

You need to grow up.

On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 1:58:28 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 8:36:51 AM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 1:14:12 PM UTC+1, wsne... wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 7:59:16 AM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:

Any responsible person will realize that this is nothing more than attention seeking...

Says the idiot whose voluminous nonsense in this group stands third only to peterson's and chrisbcritter's.

Odd that you, chrisbcritter (and, I suspect, peterson) are all of British origin. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

Oh no, how could you, how terrible that you would call me British instead of Irish !!!!.

"British" refers to citizens of the UK and Ireland. Ireland is one of the British Isles, and Northern Ireland is part of the UK, therefore "British.."


It is no accident that this is one of the most bizarre threads I have encountered in all my time in this forum ,after all, the clarity which distinguishes British citizens from Irish citizens and their territory is not an issue. The retired chemist from Britain is not an attention seeker like you and you are excused for this reason but to see a citizen of Britain go along with you is something which defies comment in any meaningful way.

'Constitutional provisions.

(1)It is hereby recognized and declared that the part of Ireland heretofore known as Eire ceased, as from the eighteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-nine, to be part of His Majesty's dominions.'

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/12-13-14/41


Collins is not a traitor as much as he is an empiricist which absolves him from any responsibility to facts which are inviolate. He probably can read his own constitution which is handed on from generation to generation and taken for granted by both British and Irish citizens.

On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 8:36:33 AM UTC-4, oriel36, who lives on one of the British Isles, wrote:

It is no accident that this is one of the most bizarre threads I have encountered in all my time in this forum

Except for all of the threads that you start and some of those that you try to hijack.

oriel36 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 1:58:28 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 8:36:51 AM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 1:14:12 PM UTC+1, wsne... wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 7:59:16 AM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:

Any responsible person will realize that this is nothing more than
attention seeking...

Says the idiot whose voluminous nonsense in this group stands third
only to peterson's and chrisbcritter's.

Odd that you, chrisbcritter (and, I suspect, peterson) are all of
British origin. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

Oh no, how could you, how terrible that you would call me British
instead of Irish !!!!.

"British" refers to citizens of the UK and Ireland. Ireland is one of
the British Isles, and Northern Ireland is part of the UK, therefore "British."


It is no accident that this is one of the most bizarre threads I have
encountered in all my time in this forum ,after all, the clarity which
distinguishes British citizens from Irish citizens and their territory is
not an issue. The retired chemist from Britain is not an attention seeker
like you and you are excused for this reason but to see a citizen of
Britain go along with you is something which defies comment in any meaningful way.

'Constitutional provisions.

(1)It is hereby recognized and declared that the part of Ireland
heretofore known as Eire ceased, as from the eighteenth day of April,
nineteen hundred and forty-nine, to be part of His Majesty's dominions.'

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/12-13-14/41


Collins is not a traitor as much as he is an empiricist which absolves
him from any responsibility to facts which are inviolate. He probably can
read his own constitution which is handed on from generation to
generation and taken for granted by both British and Irish citizens.




Here is another statement of fact for you to ignore.


"British Isles" on @Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles?wprov=sfsi1

On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 1:51:10 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 8:36:33 AM UTC-4, oriel36, who lives on one of the British Isles, wrote:

It is no accident that this is one of the most bizarre threads I have encountered in all my time in this forum

Except for all of the threads that you start and some of those that you try to hijack.

I am sure that you believe the mighty Missouri is a Canadian river because some of the Canadian tributaries link up with that river but then again this is descending to a intellectual depth where common sense and any structured reasoning no longer exists.

http://source.sdsu.edu/source_of_mis...n_map-1200.jpg


You managed to drag a retired chemist and a British citizen into asserting that the Shannon is a river in the British Isles when clearly his own constitution dissolved the term 'British Isles' in any meaningful way.

Maybe he is intransigent and can't accept the geographical and distinctions that identify British and Irish nationals within his own Country's Constitution but so unusual to see a complete lack of reasonableness or the presence of an illness that makes it that way.

The 'British Isles' is basically unattended business that most people with common sense can take or leave but constitutionally is does exist for either the Irish or British people.

On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 2:09:05 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 1:58:28 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 8:36:51 AM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 1:14:12 PM UTC+1, wsne... wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 7:59:16 AM UTC-4, oriel36 wrote:

Any responsible person will realize that this is nothing more than
attention seeking...

Says the idiot whose voluminous nonsense in this group stands third
only to peterson's and chrisbcritter's.

Odd that you, chrisbcritter (and, I suspect, peterson) are all of
British origin. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

Oh no, how could you, how terrible that you would call me British
instead of Irish !!!!.

"British" refers to citizens of the UK and Ireland. Ireland is one of
the British Isles, and Northern Ireland is part of the UK, therefore "British."


It is no accident that this is one of the most bizarre threads I have
encountered in all my time in this forum ,after all, the clarity which
distinguishes British citizens from Irish citizens and their territory is
not an issue. The retired chemist from Britain is not an attention seeker
like you and you are excused for this reason but to see a citizen of
Britain go along with you is something which defies comment in any meaningful way.

'Constitutional provisions.

(1)It is hereby recognized and declared that the part of Ireland
heretofore known as Eire ceased, as from the eighteenth day of April,
nineteen hundred and forty-nine, to be part of His Majesty's dominions.'

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/12-13-14/41


Collins is not a traitor as much as he is an empiricist which absolves
him from any responsibility to facts which are inviolate. He probably can
read his own constitution which is handed on from generation to
generation and taken for granted by both British and Irish citizens.




Here is another statement of fact for you to ignore.


"British Isles" on @Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles?wprov=sfsi1


The issue you dragged yourself into was that if a person is from the British Isles then they are British and adding to this by asserting that the Shannon river is in Britain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...naming_dispute

There is no dispute, since 1949 when Ireland achieved full sovereignty as a nation distinct from Britain , the idea of the British Isles ceased to exist along with it. Most reasonable people accept the overlap where geological or geographical studies were framed as the British isles as a convenience but to insist that an Irish citizen is attached to Britain in some way because of this convenience is almost unanswerable.

Thanks for reminding me how awful an empirical mindset actually is where you would actually betray your own constitution as opposed to those who merely work with the flawed notion of the British Isles .