http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rb_rDkwGnU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTihOwQGID0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhSP8b1OBAg http://www.google.com/search?q=run+your+car+on+water&sourceid=opera&num=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
That would be like 'throwing out the baby with the bathwater'. We are an integral part of the planet and are an extension or expression of its' life force, as is every other living creature. I think it would be like losing use of a highly developed sensory organ - like the eyes - if we were eradicated. Humans have lived in harmony with nature for the most part - tens of thousands of years at least. It's only been since the relatively recent industrial revolution in the west that the balance between man and nature has been significantly disrupted and we've become a 'cancer'. All stemming, in fact, from arrogant, power-craving, rich, white men who perceived themselves as lord and master over nature.
I will agree that for the most part there was limited impact on the earth, I still believe we are but fleas on the arse of the dog when it comes to our impact on the earth, but yes in the last 200 years we have made technological advances that make most other 'eras' pale in comparison. I dont think the 'west' was the only one making advances during the industrial revolution. I also dont believe 'rich white men' are the root of all evil, nor the only individuals who perceive themselves as 'master of nature'. I dont think the pharoas in africa were white. I mean, they could control the weather by killing people so they must have been somewhat powerhungry.
I was referring specifically to the industrial revolution and the attitudes of the arrogant, little 'god-like' Victorians with their alienated sense of reason that went hand in hand with its origins. I'd say that was the point where we went completely off the tracks and diverged from nature leading to the enormous imbalance (and threat to all life) we are now experiencing.
Excellent. So all those beatings i've administered to Barry over the years are finally starting to pay off, and now all i have to do is mention a few keywords, then sit back and watch as he obediently turns up and makes himself available for punishment - or even punishes himself in advance of the disdain and abuse he has by now grown so accustomed to.
I have always kind of thought that there was life on Venus at one time before life on Earth. http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA09/venus297.php As for the wasteful and lazy humans who will NEVER quit burning fuel: "There have been quite a number of mathematical models of climate changes developed throughout the years. The majority of the models suppose that the combustion of the fossil fuel results in the gradual increase of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, which subsequently changes surface temperatures on the planet as well. The balanced running of global changes, however, is only one of the variants of the forthcoming future – the most optimistic one of them. The balance implies an opportunity to slow negative changes down and reduce the intensity of the man-caused impact on ecology. The climate model of Russian biophysicists from Krasnoyarsk describes the dynamics of three carbon reservoirs: the atmosphere, living plants and organic remnants. The model characterizes only near-surface ground processes, which allows to disregard the thermal inertia of the ocean. According to the model, the complete cessation of the man-caused carbon emission in the atmosphere in 2059 will save the biosphere of the Earth from destruction. If humans stop polluting the environment only five years later than that, in 2064, irreversible changes will start in the middle of the 24th century, and the absolute end will take place in the beginning of the 25th century. If mankind continues burning fuel until 2090, humans will become extinct before 2200, scientists from the Institute of Biophysics in Krasnoyarsk said."
you need more energy to create hydrogen from water than can be gained by burning the hydrogen created.. basic physics.. that first video and his claims are debunked pretty well in this thread here http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=56705 the second video.. well i think that has some secret concoction of chemicals in there to create the hydrogen.. and actually the power output in relation to the price the guy is asking?... $400 initially + $20 for the 'cell'.. for enough power to run a laptop for 5 hours?... or $20 to charge an ipod or phone for a few hours running time?...
Yeah, it is a bit of a rip-off right now.. But its a step in the right direction though, right? I mean, how long did it take us to get to the level of MPG fuel economy we get from petrol now? Fuel efficiency will always increase given enough time. Its just that most are not given that time. Things can always be subsidised by other power sources anyway, we have tides, wind, solar etc that can augment anything we make. It doesnt always have to be oil. What about the magnetic motor: http://www.projectcamelot.org/magnetic_motor.html You can even make one yourself for a reasonable price.. I think I might start one for a project when I get my cash sorted.
I've always wondered why they've never invented a kinetic powersource that can 'drive' itself once its started. IE you use a small electrical power source to start the vehicle moving, then us the turning of the wheels to generate more power to keep turning the wheels and charging the battery for start up once you start. Simple.
