[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Is Al Gore your leader?

What do you care?

Lan said:

I can lie all I want about global warming and make no difference in the scheme of things.

[Ciberblade]

Should this thread be renamed to:
"Science? Supported by Global Warming???"

[LANMaster]

Jack, you're clearly trying to misrepresent what I said.
If your position is as solid as you seem to claim, you wouldn't be resorting to such a slanderous tactic.

I will re-iterate my point, just in case you weren't taking me out of context deliberately.

When AlGore lies, people believe him. It has an affect on policy.

What I should have written was I COULD lie (but I have no reason to) and it wouldn't alter policy.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

.........................

We can get off this anytime you want. I was being sarcastic.
reducing man-made emissions (being 3-4% of total emissions of gg on the planet) by as much as 25% won't matter a hill of beans in the grand scheme of things.
You might as well try to limit volcanic emissions. Get the sarcasm there? Sure hope so.


You can't make a volcano quiet, which is the point I was making. Sheeesh, you're thick today.

Squirm all you want.
That was not the manner in which you originally posted.
I'm seeing a pattern


I'll repeat for the scientifically challenged.
The forces of nature can not be controlled by your political position.
The activities of man can.
The 3-4 % of man's contribution to the situation is what is alleged to be the factor that is speeding up the natural progression of global warming.
The question goes to how to reduce that element and what benefit is derived from the effort/expense.


But, what do you care?
It's not a physical problem for you.....the next election is the issue and you post:

I can lie all I want about global warming and make no difference in the scheme of things.

For you, it's now obvious any outcome is irrelevant other than the next elected official.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Jack, you're clearly trying to misrepresent what I said.
...............

.........

I can lie all I want about global warming and make no difference in the scheme of things.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Jack, you're clearly trying to misrepresent what I said.
If your position is as solid as you seem to claim, you wouldn't be resorting to such a slanderous tactic.

I will re-iterate my point, just in case you weren't taking me out of context deliberately.

When AlGore lies, people believe him. It has an affect on policy.

What I should have written was I COULD lie (but I have no reason to) and it wouldn't alter policy.

Perhaps you would like to rewrite many of your previous posts
An no....I got you point crystal clear.....your only concern is the next election, and the next election and the election after that, on and on and on...........no different than Gore or any other Lefty.
But after the next election, I suspect the scientific discussion of global warming will continue......no matter who wins.

[LANMaster]

[Stoner]

Well....at least I got you thinking of solutions

[LANMaster]

always.

[LANMaster]

Since we were discussing fusion a bit earlier in this thread ...........


Fusion reactor work gets go-ahead


Seven international parties involved in an experimental nuclear fusion reactor project have initialled a 10bn-euro (£6.8bn) agreement on the plan. The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (Iter) will be the most expensive joint scientific project after the International Space Station.
Wednesday's agreement in Brussels gives the go-ahead for practical work on the project to start.
Fusion taps energy from reactions like those that power the Sun.
The seven-party consortium, which includes the European Union, the US, Japan, China, Russia and others, agreed last year to build Iter in Cadarache, in the southern French region of Provence.
Cleaner energy
The parties say fusion will lead to a cheaper, safer, cleaner and endless energy resource in the years ahead.
"We represent more than half of the world's population, and recognise that by working together today we stand a much better chance of tackling the challenges of tomorrow, so energy is an issue of concern for all of us," said EU science and research commissioner, Janez Potocnik, after the ceremony.



ITER - NUCLEAR FUSION PROJECT
Project estimated to cost 10bn euros and will run for 35 years
It will produce the first sustained fusion reactions
Final stage before full prototype of commercial reactor is built

He said that the participants would aim to ratify their agreement before the end of the year so construction on the facility could start in 2007. Officials said the experimental reactor would take about eight years to build. The EU is to foot about 50% of the cost to build the experimental reactor. If all goes well with the experimental reactor, officials hope to set up a demonstration power plant at Cadarache by 2040.
In a fusion reaction, energy is produced when light atoms - the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium - are fused together to form heavier atoms.
To use controlled fusion reactions on Earth as an energy source, it is necessary to heat a gas to temperatures exceeding 100 million Celsius - many times hotter than the centre of the Sun.
The technical requirements to do this, which scientists have spent decades developing, are immense; but the rewards, if Iter can be made to work successfully, are extremely attractive.
Investment costs
One kilogram of fusion fuel would produce the same amount of energy as 10,000,000kg of fossil fuel.
Fusion does produce radioactive waste but not the volumes of long-term high-level radiotoxic materials that have so burdened nuclear fission.
Officials project that 10-20% of the world's energy could come from fusion by the end of the century. However, environmental groups have criticised the project, saying there was no guarantee that the billions of euros would result in a commercially viable energy source.


"Investment in energy efficiency and renewables is the only reliable way to guarantee energy security," said Silvia Hermann, from Friends of the Earth Europe. "Giving billions of euros to a single nuclear project that is so far from reality is ill judged and irresponsible." The European Commission said the investment costs were justified, explaining that the technology used in fusion reactor plants would be "inherently safe, with no possibility of meltdown, or runaway reactions."
The Cadarache site is also expected to boost Europe's role in developing new technologies and is likely to create about 10,000 jobs.
The consortium had been divided over where to put the test reactor, and competition was intense. Russia, China and the European Union wanted it at Cadarache; while Japan, the US and South Korea wanted the facility built at Rokkasho in northern Japan.
Japan withdrew its bid after agreeing to a bigger role in research and operations.
The Cadarache site lies about 60km (37 miles) inland from Marseille, and has been a nuclear research centre ever since President Charles de Gaulle launched France's atomic energy programme in 1959.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/h...ch/5012638.stm

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Jack, you're clearly trying to misrepresent what I said.
If your position is as solid as you seem to claim, you wouldn't be resorting to such a slanderous tactic.

I will re-iterate my point, just in case you weren't taking me out of context deliberately.

When AlGore lies, people believe him. It has an affect on policy.

What I should have written was I COULD lie (but I have no reason to) and it wouldn't alter policy.

Coulda, shoulda woulda, but DIDN'T!

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Coulda, shoulda woulda, but DIDN'T!

Had he included what I had written right after that, the context would have been clear .... even to you.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Had he included what I had written right after that, the context would have been clear .... even to you.

Then let's look at your complete post:
http://forums.techguy.org/3635650-post144.html


excerpts>>>>
Paragraph right before the statement I quoted you on:

Once again, the fact that I am political about the issue is irrelivant, as I am only a user posting at a forum.
AlGore is a former Vice President, and a potential candidate for '08.

Your quote in a complete paragraph of it's own:

I can lie all I want about global warming and make no difference in the scheme of things.

Next and final paragraph:

AlGore is a frontrunner in the Democrat Party. Hys utter bulklcrap makes a big difference in the scheme of things. You may not follow his BS with regard to the global climate and humanity's role (or maybe you do) but many people do, including those on the international scene in Cannes etc.

Looks clear to me.
Because Gore lies, you rationalize doing the same. And you claim it is of no consequence.
Perhaps you thought something else, but what I quoted you on... was not out of context.....if we're using the English language...

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Then let's look at your complete post:
http://forums.techguy.org/3635650-post144.html


excerpts>>>>
Paragraph right before the statement I quoted you on:


Your quote in a complete paragraph of it's own:


Next and final paragraph:


Looks clear to me.
Because Gore lies, you rationalize doing the same. And you claim it is of no consequence.
Perhaps you thought something else, but what I quoted you on... was not out of context.....if we're using the English language...

Face it Lan, you're busted!

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Then let's look at your complete post:
http://forums.techguy.org/3635650-post144.html


excerpts>>>>
Paragraph right before the statement I quoted you on:


Your quote in a complete paragraph of it's own:


Next and final paragraph:


Looks clear to me.
Because Gore lies, you rationalize doing the same. And you claim it is of no consequence.
Perhaps you thought something else, but what I quoted you on... was not out of context.....if we're using the English language...

It was totally out of context, and you know it.

The context is clear to anyone who has an ounce of integrity.

Anything I say on the matter is irrelivant, whether I have told the truth or lied about it, which I haven't.
Al Gore spouts his junk science and it makes a difference in the scheme of things.

I have now explained the context clearly.....AGAIN.

Show that you have an ounce of integrity and stop misrepresenting what I have said.

Originally Posted by bassetman

Face it Lan, you're busted!

For what?