VideoHelp Forum




Closed Thread
Page 4 of 5
FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 143
  1. Originally Posted by g_shocker182
    I know, I know, but I dont want it to go furthur.
    OK, I won't take it any further. No problem.

    But let me tell y'all why I posted my expose on early adulthood.

    Greed. Pure, filthy human greed.

    I cannot believe for one minute that if the world's oil reserves were this close to drying up, human greed would simply allow it to happen and not do anything about it. I can't speak for Europe and her citizens, but I can tell you for certain that this would never be allowed to happen in the United States. We are far too cynical to allow it.

    I have subscribed to the theory that Big Oil has held patents on innovative energy technology for decades. I've even gone as far as suggesting they've perfected a practical hydrogen fuel cell, or a process to make spent fuel rods from nuclear power plants safer, and kept the technology under wraps. The reason? It's their ace in the hole when the oil runs out and they suddenly have no means with which to continue their existence. This ensures their survival into a new generation, which means more money for the rich to get even richer.

    The judicial climate in the United States is reaching a point where oil has become somewhat of an evil enterprise. In my opinion, we are not too far off from the worst energy crisis since the Industrial Revolution began. We put a man on the moon, we've extended life through such revolutions as transplants and artificial hearts, and yet America, as powerful as we proclaim ourselves to be, had rolling blackouts in California.

    We can't build new power plants without 20 years of environmental impact studies and lawsuits from the NIMBY crowd. At the same time, we don't have the backbone to attack the problems where they exist: the consumer level. You aren't going to change anything when 8- and 10-cylinder SUVs and trucks are the preferred choice of the average American driver. With those kind of profits rolling into the automakers, where's the incentive force them to meet more stringent EPA guidelines? And you're not going to change anything when it becomes financially or legally impractical to build new power plants or explore the Earth for new resources.


    We're being told fuel-cell cars are right around the corner. Is it because we're running out of oil? I doubt it. I think it has more to do with economics than supply. Who do you think will take the lead in providing the materials, technology and consumables if we begin a transition to fuel-cell or electric cars? The people who stand to lose the most by its acceptance.

    There's enough oil for another 20-200 years, depending on which source of information you believe. The question is will it remain cost-effective to continue extracting it from the ground? If the US government offers incentives for fuel-cell research and production, maybe not. This is where the environmentalists missed the boat; rather than sue the daylights out of everybody they should have focused on the legislative process. Government money is good, but free government money is even better.

    So, having said all this, I don't think it truly matters how much oil is left under the ground. The almight dollar (or Pound Sterling, or Yen, or Franc) will determine how long we actually remain attached to petroleum.

  2. Your right. Economics does drive everything. Everything. On this Earth at least.

  3. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Chapter One

    We'll see practical fuel cells when the oil companies allow us to. When they find it more profitable to crack petroleum feedstocks into hydrogen and other products they can find or create an outlet for. Cheaper now to make gas and diesel fuel.

    As is, they're stuck with a mountain of sulphur, though it is used in thousands of ways. The world isn't full of "sweet Texas crude", most of the world's oil is "sour crude", 3 % or more sulphur, and the EPA and other agencies, and countries, too, I'd imagine want sulphur removed from gasoline, causes acid rain and other effects.That's near a gallon and a half of sulphur per barrel, times the millions of barrels per day consumed here, alone.

    Cheapest way to make hydrogen is cracking oil. To split water into H and O would take the output of several of those nuclear plants to make a days supply, and what do you do with all that oxygen? Replenish the atmosphere to what some scientists think it was thousands of years ago, 25 to 30%? We're under 21 and falling.

    Transport and storage. How? We use steel pipe for oil products. Steel doesn't like hydrogen. Hydrogen embrittlement, eats into the steel, causes microfractures, and it has to be under many atmospheres pressure to get any meaningful amount into any reasonable volume for auto or home use.

    Even with natural gas, from the producing fields to points of distribution, it's pumped at several hundred PSI, and pumping stations at intervals to boost the pressure again, as it has inertia, and friction, and will slow down with distance.

    Anyone recall that within a short time of assuming office GW announced he was going to ask major funding for fuel cells? One editorialist wrote that a college student working as a bartender said "Wow, he's an oilman, and he'd do that? Maybe I was wrong about him.". No, he wasn't wrong, he is an oilman, always will be, and this is good for Big Oil. "We'll make all the hydrogen you want, at the right price."

    As to nuclear aircraft carriers, they don't run for months on "a couple grams" of uranium. More like 5 to 10 tons of fuel rods. And, I do believe, they change them out annualy. All they do is boil water, same thing as a coal or oil fired boiler does, but instead of 5 to 800 degrees, as in fuel fired boilers, nukes go to 10,000 degrees F. Basically, the water is flooded over the reactor core to keep it from going critical.

    That superheated water, under immense pressure, to keep a hydrogen bubble from forming and blowing up the ship, as happened at Chernobyl AND at Three Mile Island, and at those sites caused a hydrogen explosion. The core became no longer water covered, became white hot and ignited the hydrogen. In TMI's case, because an alarm kept sounding, they'd investigate, nothing wrong, muffle that damn thing, it's wrong.

    All the monitors were wrong, too, when there was an unexpected release of pressure from TMI, so much radiation released, no, our meters were wrong, way less than that.

    As to the saviour of us all, ethanol, wrong. All it actually does for "us", is allow the oil industry to improve the octane rating of their product. Gasohol, required by law, and very heavily subsidized, hey, Archer-Daniels-Midland is a very big and powerful company, raises the octane rating a smidge, and reduces mileage. Gasoline has 20,750 BTU per pound, about 130,000 per gallon, and ethanol, 11,000 per pound, 70,000 per gallon. And, boys and girl, what you have under that hood is a HEAT engine, pure and simple, that is only about 30% efficient on its best day.

    So, ADM tells its pals in the regulatory agencies it has all this land free because all the needs of the people who can pay the tariff are already met, and they need to plant something on that land to make even more money. How about you pass a regulation that every gallon of civilian used gas (that's us and our daily consumption) has to be 10% ethanol.

    And, hey, it costs more to make this stuff than 10% of a gallon of gasoline, so, to ensure that we don't turn around and bite you on the ass, give us a few bucks a gallon, just so we can make a little profit, or Dwayne Andreas is gonna get pissed at us, and maybe fire our asses, and we won't be able to give you a nice little job when the other party takes over and kicks you out.

    So, now you have the best of both worlds. The tree huggers are happy, because 10% of the gasoline is now a renewable resource.

    The oil companies are happy, because they never did like that damn TMBE (I think) and those damn treehuggers made us take lead out of gas, and it would cost a lot of money to actually tool up to make a plain old gasoline that would burn in an engine without destroying it.

    And, what the hell, you expect us to grow too much corn and drive down the price enough that those starving 3rd worlders can afford it? Hey, nothing against them, but this is business.

    Those nuke plants again.

    When I worked at Westinghouse, ours were the best design in the world, and ours was the largest installed base, more of ours than all the other US mfgs.

    Our largest generator was 1,365,000 kilowatts. A large nuke plant would have 4 to 8 of them, 6 to 12 million kilowatts. A generator doesn't push power out, it doesn't work, till you flick a light switch, and create a demand. Just simmering, control rods in, core dampened, 200 ton rotors just idly spinning, at 9 or 18 or 3600 RPM. And, since the power grid operators know what the typical demand is at 6 AM on Monday, they fire up the "peaking units", almost all natural gas fired turbine driven generators, quick to fire off, easy to shut down, till5 PM, when we all start coming home from work..

    So, a nuke doesn't have the problem of all that electric and nowhere to go. Like those batteries on your shelf, just laying there for 3 years, till you put 'em in your flashlight and flick the switch.

    I'm gonna cut this chapter, now. I had the whole book written, an hour ago, min'd my browser to install Encarta to check my figures, and the sucker closed Netscape on me. Had to come in and retype, and I type slow.

    Chapter 2 will follow, soon.

    Cheers,

    George

  4. Originally Posted by gmatov
    Chapter One

    We'll see practical fuel cells when the oil companies allow us to.
    Is there an echo in here?!

    No arguments with you so far, and I can't wait to see Chapter 2. But I would like to offer one clarification. And yes, I'm going to quote hard facts instead of The World Accoding to Indolikaa.

    http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/ships/ship-cv.html

    Nimitz was commissioned in 1975 and had it's first refueling in 1998. At least, that's what the Navy claims. Fuel rod replacement or reactor swap? I would suspect the latter myself...

  5. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Indolikaa,

    It's entirely possible you're right on that, and I am thinking of subs. Or maybe the same with subs. Regardless, they don't run forever, but for a pretty damn long time.

    However, they do, as per an episode I watched on the Hitler channer, draw a million gallons a week of JP5 aviation fuel just to do their training flights and recon flights, to protect the ship, if no other reason.

    Wonder how much they draw now that they are in a "war zone " in the Gulf.

    Much more to say, don't want to submit Chapter 2 till I get a buffer between 1 and 2.

    Cheers,

    George

    Wanted to chime in again on the "Protect My DVD Wedding Output From Them Thieves", but I am biased, married off 4 daughters, they're bandits, just don't wear a mask, what a world..

  6. That "grams" crap I found it a chemistry book. The way I worded it was faulty too, because it doesn't directly power a ship, like it may have come out on your end.

  7. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Shocker,

    Don't worry about it. They will tell you what the total energy is per gram, or even less of any given material.

    12,000 BTU per pound of hard coal, but you have to put 50 pounds in the fireplace and the house is still chilly.

    Problem with "book larnin" is it's the only kind they accept in the entry level world. It may be wrong, but try telling your prof he's wrong.

    Hell, try telling a prospectiive employer what he knows is wrong, then go to your next interview. You sure ain't getting hired there.

    You're gonna learn, buddy. Just takes a little real life.

    Cheers,

    George

  8. I understood what you were saying. Funny, I never caught the 'grams' in your statement.

    And speaking of your statement? I am 100% in support of nuclear power. Fusion is the answer, but I think fission is a good intermediate. It is a very volatile topic because there is so much misinformation out there, and I agree that BJ_M knows his fuels.

    I'm also a big supporter of solar power and wind power, two options that work very well out where I live.

  9. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Chapter 2:

    As to new power plants, the business section of our local paper reported over the weekend that there were, I think, 36 new coal fired plants coming on line in the next couple years. The utilities have decided coal is their best bargain, per BTU, today.

    They are generally built at the face of a proven coal field large enough to feed them for 20 years or more, dig it, run it out on conveyers, pulverize and blow into the boilers. Simple. Cheap. Even cheap in lives, today, as the longwall and continuous miners are safer and require fewer miners to operate. Just take all the coal out and let the mountain, or that housing subdivision sink down to its new, natural, level.

    Our own Henry Kissinger started the oil price rise of 73, anyhow. He went to the Shah of Shahs, and told him that since he was a little short of cash, and couldn't buy any more jet fighters from the US, he could raise the price of crude from fifty cents to a buck a barrel. The Shah did, and the world survived, barely, and he said, "Hey, wonder what would happen at 2 bucks? Wow, I'm making a lot more money now. I LIKE this deal.".

    That's the time when I had a big assed Ford LTD. Pissed me off one day on the work. "Six f'in bucks to fill my gas tank!!!"

    Now it's 6 bucks to fill the can for the mower.

    Shocker, in my day, a gas price war was 26 cents down there, 25 cents here. 'Course, back then, I put 30 cents in the smokes machine, the pack came out with 3 pennies under the cellophane wrapper. Times do change.

    Oil one worlders are not the only ones who can hold us hostage. Back to Westinghouse, in 73, 74, again, the fuel crisis, we had contracts to maintain our power plants. That included fuel rod replenishment. We, stupidly, put a clause in our contracts that carried up to a 6 % inflation clause.

    Gulf, and the other biggies in oil, at the time, smart people, spread their tentacles to every facet of energy, artificially hiked uranium prices from 6 to around 18 bucks a pound, trebled the price.

    Westinghouse invoked the "prudent business" defense, or some such, and refused to honor their contract at disastrous prices. Of course, all the utilities under contract sued, the House settled for billions in "equipment and future services", and I am still working instead of having retired 15 months ago at full pension.

    One thing that gives me a little satisfaction is that the Mellon controlled Gulf Oil iwas one of the casualties, turned upon and et by the stronger jackals in the pack. F'em.

    There is more oil in the ground today, according to some sources, than there was 50 years ago. Why, they can't explain. Echo-location is that much improved? Or maybe it isn't dinosaurs, even though Dilbert's "Bob the Dinosaur wants to be reincarnated as a can of WD-40.

    They have estimates of 200 years and more, and unless that is propaganda, so that you pollyannas don't say "Why should I buy a new car, wel'll be out of gas before it's paid off."

    Chicken Littles abound, and they don't realize tose shouting from the rooftops, or David Letterman's Guest Chair either do this, or they go get a job, and just what the hell are they qualified for, to say "Oh, that looks bad," "Oh, that can't be fixed.", "Oh, we're in trouble."

    Chapter 3 only if I go back and find more refutable tripe after I post.

    Should get on you Global Warming/Global Cooling kids. Depends on when you get out of college. Depends on what you do when you do.. You go to work, it's bull, you go into politics, it's the gospel. You go into science, it's a theory that I can make a good case for.

    Cheers,

    George

  10. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Fission is one thing. We split the atom with the first atom bomb.

    Fusion is a bitch. I worked with the people buidling the Tokamak containment magnets, a whole bunch of magnetic devices that would make a huge containment vessel to keep the fused particles away from anything that would damp, and kill the process.

    These magnets were supposed to generate either 1000 or 10,000 Tesla. 1 Tesla is 10,000 times the magnetic attraction of the Earth. One very serious magnetic bottle.

    Didn't work. Billions spent. US Gov bucks, meaning our tax bucks. When, IF, we developed it, give it to Marathon, let them make billions, just as most medicines are products of US Gov Labs, but the druggies tell us it takes billions to make a Przac, and bunches fail, so they have to charge 300 bucks a pill till they recoup their expenses. Not the 300 million to tell you to ask for the "Purple Pill", but the money telling you to tell your doctor you think you should be on this instead of that.

    I'm going to bed, hope there is at least a little here that makes sense tomorrow.

    Cheers,

    George

  11. Master of Time & Space Capmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Denver, CO United States
    Search Comp PM
    Fusion is a bitch. I worked with the people buidling the Tokamak containment magnets, a whole bunch of magnetic devices that would make a huge containment vessel to keep the fused particles away from anything that would damp, and kill the process.

    These magnets were supposed to generate either 1000 or 10,000 Tesla. 1 Tesla is 10,000 times the magnetic attraction of the Earth. One very serious magnetic bottle.

    Didn't work. Billions spent. US Gov bucks, meaning our tax bucks.
    And this was only one of the many directions we were going back in the late '70s and early '80s. The others being laser inertial confinement, particle beam inertial confinement ...heck, the Russians were even able to produce neutrons by firing a hypervelocity lead slug into a grooved lead plate that held a D-T pellet on its surface. Crude, but proof that the potential reward is there.

    Part of the problem with every program was that they were staffed by egotistical experimenters who subscribe to the "publish or perish" axiom. These pampered PhDs got paid good money to play around all day on these multimillion dollar, taxpayer-funded accelerators, and their own agenda of furthering their own fame and recognition at the next meeting of the APS steered their primary direction of investigation. They weren't trying to do anything as Don Quixote-ish as providing the world with a cheap, abundant energy source, although that's the argument they used when they went to congress requesting more and more money to build these high-physics playgrounds. They were after ego-stroking, personal gain and recognition among their own peers. The field was dominated by overeducated primadonnas who, by their own off-the-record admission acknowledge that the world won't see it succeed any time soon, and they're just there for the glory and the expensive toys. A shame we were suckered into supporting this sort of high-science raping of the coffers :P

  12. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Cap,

    We were and we weren't suckered into this.

    We weren't, in that we allowed the yoyos we elect to all levels of gov to spend our tax dollars on pie in the sky, when we couldn't control the ins.

    We were, in that every damn one up for re-election didn't get kicked out over the next 6 year Senat cycle. I mean, every elective office would be up over 6 years, all 3 staggered parts of the Senate, as well as the 2 year Reps and the 4 year Pres.

    We kinda get what we elect.

    How about the Super-Super Collider they wanted to build, either in the flatlands of Texas, or the flatlands of Ohio, flatlands, both, relatively speaking, as the would have to dig anywhere from 6 feet to maybe 600 feet for a , I think, 250 mile in circuference ditch to line with hundreds of thousads of magnets to shoot molecules around, and hit a target, and come up with super rare new elements? We were ready to foot the bill. Well, our elected officials were.

    As to the magnetic containment, and fusion, it's a "Clean power source". None of that yucky radioactive residue that has to be stored for thousands of years. But in the end, millions of tons of lower level radioactive Lithium vessel wall lining that would have to be constantly replaced, and the "bad" stuff hauled away.

    Hey,who was the paranoid above who said he believes the monopolies buy or steal all the true developments that could triple gas mileage, or whatever. He can join my club anytime. I'm a paranoid who believes it's not only possible but probable. "You, you little shit, ain't killing my billion dollar business!"

    like the stories of a guy buying a new car, driving it 500 miles, saying my gas guage must be broke, fills it up, takes 10 gallons, writes the car's maker to say, hey, great car, fantastic mileage, they come and haul it off, oops, test car, you shouldn't have had it.

    Rudolf Diesel, dying mysteriously from supposedly falling overboard on a boat, when he was developing the compression ignition engine, way better than the carbureted gasoline engines and steam engines of the time. First designs ran on pulverized coal, for christ's sake, would have killed the Rockefellers and Morgans oil monopoly, stillborn.

    I gotta go elsewhere, end this now, will post more tomorrow.

    Cheers,

    George

  13. @Capmaster,

    I wrote a thread awhile back. One of the things I mentiond is how much joy I used to get out of firing PhDs.

    You just explained with true eloquence why I enjoyed it so much. You can't imagine what it's like to send one of these "I am the center of the universe!" prima-donnas packing. Or can you?

  14. Master of Time & Space Capmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Denver, CO United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by indolikaa
    @Capmaster,

    I wrote a thread awhile back. One of the things I mentiond is how much joy I used to get out of firing PhDs.

    You just explained with true eloquence why I enjoyed it so much. You can't imagine what it's like to send one of these "I am the center of the universe!" prima-donnas packing. Or can you?
    I can. It's not a pretty sight when they realize they aren't worshipped far and wide The physicists seem particularly inclined to this self-worship tendency.
    And thanks for the nice words. I get these rare moments when it just comes flowing out, usually when it's a subject I am interested in like this. Most of the time I'm limited to the odd sarcastic comment
    Now gmatov .....I want him to write my next book

  15. Member shoozleboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Let me ask my wife....
    Search Comp PM
    That superheated water, under immense pressure, to keep a hydrogen bubble from forming and blowing up the ship, as happened at Chernobyl AND at Three Mile Island, and at those sites caused a hydrogen explosion.
    I'm from the TMI area.... been living here all my life, including through the "accident" they had in 79.... One thing here, and I'm sure gmatov is aware of this as well, TMI blew up inside it's containment shell (unlike Chernobyl which had no 'shell'), it then melted through the ground, and no one knew what it was that exploded or even that the 'core' had melted, until the whole situation was over days later... scary.

    as far as radiation, while many of us are convinced that some did escape, just how much has yet to be seen in any real impact to the enviroment... Hell, I and many others put our boats in the Susquehanna River in Goldsboro (directly across from the island called Three Mile).... we fish, swim, and screw there.... never had any problems with three eyed fish, limbs falling off, or impotence..... Sure, some people die of cancer in this area, but last I had seen, those numbers aren't any worse than non-nuclear power plant areas ....

    I'm not an advocate of nuclear power, nor an opponet... I think most of us just accept it as a way of life nowadays.... I now live 25 miles north of the plant now and I can still see the plumes of steam coming off the two cooling towers that are still being used with the one remaining good reactor... not a day goes by that we see that and wonder what could have happened had the 'containment shell' been breached by a Chernobyl like explosion.. of course, we may not still be here if that had happened.

    (sorry - didn't mean to take this off the topic... just throwing in some first person insight to the nuclear story)

  16. Master of Time & Space Capmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Denver, CO United States
    Search Comp PM
    At the time I remember reading an informal test they did. They bought some 400-speed 35mm film from the nearest store to TMI downwind at the time of the accident, and bought some in Washington, DC. They wanted to compare background fogging to see if there was any difference. They found that the Wash DC rolls had seen more radiation from background sources like cosmic rays, the sun, radon, etc. The TMI rolls were cleaner. Right then and there I knew that the safety equipment at the reactor had done its job and kept the accident from being a real disaster health-wise.

  17. Growing up in Albuquerque there was a firestorm over the WIPP project and plans to run trucks through New Mexico from Idaho, Nevada and Washington, among other places.

    They built a huge bypass road around Santa Fe to keep the LANL traffic out of the center of the town. The people up there were very nervous about the whole situation because Santa Fe's main roads are generally congested and narrow.

    There are locations in Arizona where you can legally watch the New Mexico local channels on DirecTV, so sometimes we watch them. Not too long ago they were showing a video of a truck carrying the special containers (I think they're called TRUPAC-II) right down the Interstate in Albuquerque. There were three or four protestors on an overpass, and that's all the attention there was to be had.

    WIPP is for low-level transuranic waste. My understanding is all moderate- and high-level waste is destined for Yucca Mountain. www.lasg.org has an excellent website on LANL, and while the author and I are in complete disagreement over nuclear weapons(*), he does provide a vast amount of information.

    * DISCLAIMER: He supports full nuclear disarmament and compulsory observance of ICJ rulings. I do not support full disarmament and I loathe the ICJ. These are opinions and observations. Your thoughts may vary. Void where prohibited.

  18. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Capmaster
    At the time I remember reading an informal test they did. They bought some 400-speed 35mm film from the nearest store to TMI downwind at the time of the accident, and bought some in Washington, DC. They wanted to compare background fogging to see if there was any difference. They found that the Wash DC rolls had seen more radiation from background sources like cosmic rays, the sun, radon, etc. The TMI rolls were cleaner. Right then and there I knew that the safety equipment at the reactor had done its job and kept the accident from being a real disaster health-wise. :)
    there is HEAVY background radiation in some areas of washington .. namely near many goverment buildings ..

    the reason is simple --- much of the (if not all) the granite used for facing and floors is radioactive ..

    this is a true thing -- it came out during some hearings in i believe the 60's when someone whipped out a counter and got higher readings there than outside a power plant ...
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)

  19. Master of Time & Space Capmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Denver, CO United States
    Search Comp PM
    At least it's nice to know that our worst nuclear accident in history was less hazardous than working in Washington And if you include the DC crime statistics compared to Harrisburg it's way, way safer in PA

  20. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Mozambique
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by g_shocker182
    Sorry, but I won't be watching.

    If I wanted to watch something that would make up my mind for me, I'd watch something by Michael Moore.
    He's an anti-gun nut right?
    Big Government is Big Business.. just without a product and at twice the price... after all if the opposite of pro is con then wouldn’t the opposite of progress be congress?

  21. Master of Time & Space Capmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Denver, CO United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by BobV
    Originally Posted by g_shocker182
    Sorry, but I won't be watching.

    If I wanted to watch something that would make up my mind for me, I'd watch something by Michael Moore.
    He's an anti-gun nut right?
    You got the nut part right :P

  22. Member shoozleboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Let me ask my wife....
    Search Comp PM
    And if you include the DC crime statistics compared to Harrisburg it's way, way safer in PA
    Try driving on our highways !!

    He's an anti-gun nut right?
    He's so anti-"anything that he hates and wants to shove it so far down your throat until you relent to his way of thinking" - that it makes me sick..

    he's entitled to his opinions, just as much as I'm entitled to use the pages from his books to wipe my ass.....

    I watched "the Jackal" the other day and the scene where Bruce Willis is testing the high velocity gun (I'm sure Capmaster knows what it's called!) and makes that guy run across the field while he's targeting him..... you know that scene? Well, I like to picture that guy running across the field as Mr Moore..... I get a sensation of relief when the test is done...

  23. Member flaninacupboard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Northants, England
    Search Comp PM
    He's very good at what he does though, raises some serious points and emotes them at such a level even people who disagree with hm (such as yourselves) sit up and listen!

    He has done some very humorous/worrying things - i remember him selling cheap "gas" saying "oh, it's bought straight from saddam hussein, evades all the iraq sanctions so saddam gets all of the money as cash!" and people bought it by the barrel because it was cheap. or when he tried to get a ficus plant into office. also, that thing with a free gun when you open a bank account, that's just mad. but we should avoid that topic, last gun control thread i remember got locked.....

  24. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    last i heard -- there are still banks that will give you a free gun when you buy a GIC for a long enough term ...

    some petty nice ones also --

    that sure isnt in canada though




    (maybe somewhere is alberta)
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)

  25. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    I think the Bank of Boulder or some such is one of them, but you have to remember, you have to be legally able to buy one to be able to participate in this deal. A felon, prohibited from owning or even touching a weapon would not be permitted.

    And, the bank is not one of the phony "loophole" dealers the rabid antis want to legislate more against.

    You are paid your interest in advance, they hold your money for the agreed time, and ( unless I am badly mistaken here, I've never participated ) you will get a 1099 that year for interest income. A 1000 buck Weatherby, and you will pay 250 income tax on the value.

    That would be the only thing I would call "mad" about this deal.

    As to TMI, the poster who says he hasn't seen any 3 eyed fish, or other mutant freaks, has no idea what might actually be occurring. And most, if not all, the releases were pent up gases and vapors, not dust clouds, which might settle to the ground outside the site. Hell, if the wind were blowing the right way, those releases might have settled in DC and that's why the film was fogged or whatever.

    If anyone here believes that the entities that be would admit that any dangerous levels of anything are ever released into our environment by controllable or uncontrollable events, please raise your hand.

    You can be cited and fined mucho dinero if you clean a paint brush in thinner and the right people see you throw the thinner on the lawn, or in a ditch, in the right locale. But if you are a corp or a gov entity who rolls a train full of toxic chemicals off the rails, Oops, looks like it's gonna take some tax bucks to clean that up.

    Why do you think we have a taxpayer funded Superfund to clean up after the hyenas of yore who polluted areas like Love Canal? Can't take money out of their pockets.

    Michael Moore takes the side that he wants to and blows it all out of proportion to make big bucks with outrageous videography, dialogue and outright lies. He's a sensationalist, pure and simple who knows the buttons to push to get to the gullible people.

    On the contrary, Chernobyl, as does every other nuclear reactor, had a "containment vessel". Without it, you would have a huge open "saucepan", evaporating the water as quickly as you could pump it over the 10,000 degree fuel rods. Most of the water would not actually even reach the rods, just like a drop of water dances in a hot skillet from the film of steam forming beneath it.

    Chernobyl's vessel blew up and TMI's did not. The masonry structure around the pressure vessel is to protect it and the maintenance workers from the elements, and add a bit of visual enhancement to the scene. How would you like to see an open air boiler in your background? Build an attractive enclosure and you could run a slaughterhouse in most areas without problems.

    Gotta go, now, mebbe more later, if this thread gets any more posts.

    Cheers,

    George

  26. I am moving to Ephrata WA....hydro power baby!

    Fiber Optic internet with unlimited use....33.50 a month. YEAH!

    If the oil runs out, I don't care.

    I don't travel much anyway. :P

  27. I don't know why you are all worked up about Michael Moore, a wise man once told me this quote.

    It's not the extreme left that you have to worry about, all they'll do is ramble and talk, no, it's the extreme right you have to worry about because they've got the money and power to push their agenda covertly and efficiently.
    And for the record Michael Moore isn't an anti-gun nut, he's a lifetime member of the NRA however he just thinks that the gun culture ingrown in most Americans is downright crazy. I think you'll find most of the world (the one that exists outside America) also thinks the culture is crazy as well.

    Anyway, to make this post on topic have a read of this, quite an interesting read about hows life like in a nuclear dead zone.

    http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/page2.html

    (Looks like site is down for construction)

  28. Member flaninacupboard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Northants, England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by pacmania_2001

    And for the record Michael Moore isn't an anti-gun nut, he's a lifetime member of the NRA however he just thinks that the gun culture ingrown in most Americans is downright crazy. I think you'll find most of the world (the one that exists outside America) also thinks the culture is crazy as well.
    Well said

  29. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    'Myth' of Chernobyl suffering exposed

    Relocation and hand-outs have caused more illness than radiation, a new UN study concludes.

    Anthony Browne
    Sunday January 6, 2002
    The Observer

    It is seen as the worst man-made disaster in history, killing tens of thousands, making tens of millions ill, and afflicting generations to come. Exhibitions of photographs of the deformed victims have toured the world, raising funds and awareness.
    Now a report from the United Nations on the consequences of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster 15 years after the event comes to a very different conclusion. It says the medical effects of radiation are far less than was thought. The biggest damage to health has instead come from hypochondria and well-meaning but misguided attempts to help people.

    The report suggests the reloca tion of hundreds of thousands of people 'destroyed communities, broke up families, and led to unemployment, depression, and stress-related illnesses'. Generous welfare benefits, holidays, food and medical help given to anyone declared a victim of Chernobyl have created a dependency culture, and created a sense of fatalism in millions of people.

    The Human Consequences of the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident, published by the UN Development Programme and Unicef, is a challenge to those who seek to highlight the dangers of nuclear energy.

    More than 100 emergency workers on the site of the accident on 26 April 1986 suffered radiation sickness, and 41 of them died. The biggest direct consequences of the radiation are increases in childhood thyroid cancer, normally a very rare disease, that increased 60-fold in Belarus, 40-fold in Ukraine, and 20-fold in Russia, totalling 1,800 cases in all.

    The report says other evidence of increases in radiation-related diseases is very limited. 'Intensive efforts to identify an excess of leukaemia in the evacuated and controlled zone populations and recovery workers were made without success. There remains no internationally accredited evidence of an excess of leukaemia.' There is also no evidence of an increase in other cancers, and there has been no statistical increase in deformities in babies. The only deformities related to radiation were among babies of pregnant women working on the site at the time of the explosion.

    The UN believes most of the deformed babies photographed by Western charities to raise funds have nothing to do with Chernobyl, but are the normal deformities that occur at a low level in every population. 'The direct effect of radiation is not that substantial,' said Oksana Garnets, head of the UN Chernobyl programme. 'There is definitely far more psychosomatic illness than that caused by radiation.'

    The evacuation of hundreds of thousands of people, particularly from less contaminated areas, is seen as an over-reaction, which in some cases did more harm than good. 'The first reaction was to move people out. Only later did we think that perhaps some of them shouldn't have been moved. It has become clear that the direct influence of radiation on health is actually much less that the indirect consequences on health of relocating hundreds of thousands of people,' Garnets said.

    Among relocated populations, there has been a massive increase in stress-related illnesses, such as heart disease and obesity, unrelated to radiation.

    The UN is concerned about the corrosive effects of handouts to those classified as Chernobyl victims. In Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, they get more than 50 different privileges and benefits, including monthly payments and free school meals, medical treatment and holidays. In Ukraine, 'victims' get up to $100 a month.

    In Ukraine, 92,000 people have been officially designated as permanently disabled, and half of the population says their health has been affected.

    'There is an incentive to get classified as a victim. People getting benefits think they should get more and more. They think everything should be done for them by someone else - it creates a huge sense of fatalism and pessimism, which means they don't get on with their life,' Garnets said.

    In the largely deserted village of Chernobyl, 18km from the reactor and deep inside the government's total exclusion zone, the UN's report was welcomed among the 600 people who have illegally returned to their old homes.

    Nina Melnik, 47, who edits a local newsletter, said: 'I don't just know that relocating people killed more than the radiation did, it is scientifically proven. It was totally the wrong thing to do. They should open up the area and let everyone come back.'

    anthony.browne@observer.co.uk
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)

  30. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    and on the other hand for an oppisite view:

    Introduction
    On the night of 26th April, 1986, the No. 4 reactor block of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded, blasting more than 50 tonnes of nuclear fuel into the atmosphere and shattering forever the myth of safe nuclear energy.

    At the time of the accident, the Chernobyl nuclear power station consisted of four operating 1,000 megawatt power reactors sited along the banks of the Pripyat River, about sixty miles north of Kiev in the Ukraine. A fifth reactor was under construction. Chernobyl, the world's worst nuclear disaster, spread invisible radioactive fallout around the planet and forced the evacuation of 135,000 people. A further 270,000 people still live in areas placed under restrictions because of radiation.

    The Accident
    The reactor explosion was caused by a mismanaged electrical engineering experiment. With the reactor running at very low power and safety systems bypassed, the plant operators accidentally overheated the reactor core. A crippling steam explosion was followed by a more powerful nuclear explosion, which blew the roof off the reactor building and spewed blazing fuel and graphite across a wide area.1

    About 50 tons of nuclear fuel evaporated and were released by the explosion into the atmosphere (total activity around 50 million curies). In addition, about 70 tons were ejected sideways from the periphery of the core. Some 50 tons of nuclear fuel and 800 tons of reactor graphite remained in the reactor vault, where they formed a pit reminiscent of a volcanic crater as the graphite still in the reactor burned up completely in the few days after the explosion.

    The Response
    The response from the Soviet government was panicked silence: it was another 48 hours before citizens of the nearby town of Pripyat were told they had been showered with radiation, beginning the complete evacuation of the town. It fell to a Swedish radiation monitoring station to alert the international community.2

    In the aftermath, between 600,000 and 800,000 men were conscripted as Chernobyl 'liquidators'. Rosalie Bertell writes:

    "Some of these men lifted pieces of radioactive metal with their bare hands. They had to fight more than 300 fires created by the chunks of burning material spewed off by the inferno. They buried trucks, fire engines, cars and all sorts of personal belongings. They felled a forest and completely buried it, removed topsoil, bulldozed houses and filled all available clay-lined trenches with radioactive debris. The minimum conscription time was 180 days, but many stayed for a year. Some were threatened with severe punishment to their families if they failed to stay and do their duty."3




    After the accident, a sarcophagus of concrete was constructed around the reactor, to prevent further release of radioactivity. This sarcophagus is in very bad condition, and it is feared, amongst other things, that the roof could collapse. Tonnes of melted fuel still lie inside the burned out reactor.

    The Effects
    The effects of the accident are hard to comprehend. Today the 'liquidators' are suffering the full effects of their exposure. A support organisation estimated that by 1995, 13,000 of their members had died, 20% of them by suicide. 70,000 were estimated to be permanently disabled. 3

    Five million people, a quarter of them children, live in the affected areas of Ukraine and Byelorussia. One third of Byelorussia is contaminated, one fifth of its arable land is 'dead.' The contamination fell heavily over Western Europe, reaching as far away as Canada and the US. Of the 400,000 people most heavily irradiated, exposure to radiation from radioactive iodine (131I) in their thyroid glands has led to spiralling rates of thyroid cancer, particularly in children. In the Gomel region, thyroid cancers in children are now 200 times more common than before the accident.4 Some reports suggest the rate is up to ten times higher even than this in some areas.5 Researchers are warning that this is only the beginning.

    How many people will Chernobyl kill? Radiation researcher John Gofman:

    "My estimate in 1986, based upon releases of various non-iodine radionuclides, was 475,000 fatal cancers plus about an equal number of additional non-fatal cases, occurring over time both inside and outside the ex-Soviet Union" 6
    Ten years later, having studied the health data coming out of the affected areas, Dr. Gofman was standing by his predictions. Chernobyl, it seems, will kill or injure at least one million people.

    It is unknown how many people have already died because of Chernobyl. The reasons for this are nearly as disturbing as the accident itself. In a nuclear catastrophe, as in war, truth is the first casualty.


    Introduction
    The Accident
    The Response
    The Effects
    Hiding the Damage
    References


    "The Chernobyl accident dismayed the promoters of nuclear power in virtually every country on the globe. After the accident, there has been a continuous effort, by governmental and private arms of the nuclear enterprise, to put the best face on the consequences of the accident. One way to "improve" the consequences of the accident would be, of course, to reduce estimates of the public's radiation exposure from it."

    Chernobyl: A Crossroad in the Radiation Health Sciences by John Gofman






    "The accident destroyed the Chornobyl #4 reactor and killed 31 people, including 28 from radiation exposure. A further 209 on site were treated for acute radiation poisoning and among these, 145 cases were confirmed (all of whom recovered). Nobody off-site suffered from acute radiation effects."

    UIC - Chornobyl and Soviet Reactors Nuclear Issues Briefing Paper 22 December 1999












    Hiding the Damage
    The Australian UIC website is standing firm with the official line promoted by the IAEA: Chernobyl killed 31 people. Another 10 subsequently died from thyroid cancer. Total death toll: 41 people. "Nobody off-site suffered from acute radiation effects." 7

    The industry has closed ranks on the Chernobyl disaster, sponsoring its own teams to visit the area and smothering independent research. One of the few independent experts on low-level radiation, John Gofman, wrote in 1991:

    "As descriptions of health problems from Chernobyl were reaching the press, governments around the world were assembling and sponsoring international teams of experts to issue their own statements about Chernobyl's health consequences. Where do the various types of radiation experts for such teams come from? With only the rarest exceptions, they are experts who meet the approval of the nuclear communities within their respective governments. Indeed, there are extremely few radiation experts in existence anywhere who do not meet the approval of their governments, because governments worldwide are not only the chief sponsors of nuclear power, but also the chief sponsors of radiation research inside government and outside (universities, foundations, medical centers). Due to lack of independent funding, independent expertise on the health effects of radiation is extremely scarce everywhere."8
    With so much at stake, the WHO, IAEA, ICRP and other high-level bodies have been quick to blame the carnage surrounding Chernobyl on anything but radiation. Stress took a lot of the blame, according to Lynn R. Anspaugh: "There's no doubt that the people in that contaminated area think they're sick,".8 (my italics) The deception has been nearly seamless. Were it not for the horrific evidence on the ground, Chernobyl might have been swept under the carpet.

    As it is, the nuclear mafia seem only to have convinced themselves that the accident was small scale: for the rest of us, Chernobyl stands as 'the greatest technological catastrophe in human history'.


    References

    1. "CHERNOBYL - UNIQUE SAFETY VALVE FOR A REACTOR NUCLEAR EXPLOSION?" By Dr Don Arnott and Commander Robert Green RN (Ret'd)

    2. "Nuclear Madness"" by Helen Caldicott WW Norton & Co, 1994

    3. "Victims of the Nuclear Age" by Dr. Rosalie Bertell in 'The Ecologist", November 1999

    4. "Terrifying outlook for Chernobyl's babies" Rob Edwards, New Scientist 2 December 1995

    5. "Thyroid cancer takes its toll on Chernobyl's children" Jeremy Webb, New Scientist

    6. "Chernobyl's 10th: Cancer and Nuclear-Age Peace" By John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D.

    7. UIC - Chornobyl and Soviet Reactors Nuclear Issues Briefing Paper 22 December 1999

    8. "HOLOCAUST" versus "NOTHING HAPPENED" : Tales from a Distant Place . . . with a Problem Very Close to All of Us by John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D., Fall 1991

    "And from that moment on -- it was approximately one year after the catastrophe of Chernobyl, we began to call the whole organization a good united international atomic mafia which we all have to fight, of course, because they can very quickly and easily murder us."


    Vladimir Chernousenko Physicist, scientific co-ordinator of the clean-up in Chernobyl.


    Chernobyl: A Crossroad in the Radiation Health Sciences by John Gofman
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)




Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!