IM being logical, that all.
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
Nuclear power and advanced tech. The good, the bad, and the mentally unstable (aka the USSR).
- Thread starter Not_Steve
- Start date
imthatguyjordan
New Member
Playing with the hand we are dealt is last century, we should be looking at ways to move into the future rather than delaying it. I can't seem to grasp why so many people are fine living the way they are, life is not great despite what people seem to think.
Chinese medicine actually has much less destructive side effects, which is weird for me to admit as I used to think that it was bullshit. I'll leave this here for any open minded people
Strange as in it is not really conventional, and seemingly uses astrology which is highly discredited. So open mind is needed.[DOUBLEPOST=1401636698][/DOUBLEPOST]
wut
casilleroatr
New Member
I just looked at Wikipedia and it turns out the South Africa has high Uranium reserves. Maybe that is what they were up to all of those years ago. There is the reason why starting next to Shaka Zulu on Civ can be tricky.
Not_Steve
Over-Achiever
Alright guys this has gotten out of hand. Too many personal attacks have been made. In order to prevent this thread from being locked you need to do a few things.
A) Make no more personal attacks
B) Any and all arguments you make needs to be in the top half of this pyramid
C) Cite sources. Telling someone to "Google it" is not an acceptable response.
D) Self moderate. Before you press enter think about what you've written. If you see any logical fallacies rewrite your thought to remove them.
There has been some good discussion here but this thread WILL be locked if you can't stay in control of your emotions.
A) Make no more personal attacks
B) Any and all arguments you make needs to be in the top half of this pyramid
C) Cite sources. Telling someone to "Google it" is not an acceptable response.
D) Self moderate. Before you press enter think about what you've written. If you see any logical fallacies rewrite your thought to remove them.
There has been some good discussion here but this thread WILL be locked if you can't stay in control of your emotions.
imthatguyjordan
New Member
Respected scientists will not research outside of the borders of those that give them grants. Money controls the world, simple as that.
imthatguyjordan
New Member
Respected is also a vague term, who has to respect them for them to be 'respected'. I shall not continue a debate on information given by those with the biggest wallets with you. Some people can think logically, understanding that a lot of people are in it for the money, others not so much.
casilleroatr
New Member
The video you linked has another link in the description. It encourages people to donate money to the political party that Michael Tellinger (the guy speaking) started in 2012.
Also, I had to have a little laugh, at about 13:10 he starts sounding like Melissandre, expounding on R'hllor
respected as respected in scientific comunity. You know people like Hopkins. Again as stated by Not_Steve can I ask you to please back up with evidence your theory that scientific comunity is blocking this research. So far you present yourself with attitude that everything that comes from authority is false there oposit must be true but you still have no back up to your theory. For instance I see no reson why any government wouldn't be intrested in unlimited free energy and gaining massive economic edge over other governments.
Not_Steve
Over-Achiever
Honestly it's impressive that in a community like this one you think most people are in it for the money. @Eyamaz do make any money off of making pack? How about @Jadedcat? No? @KirinDave uses a different launcher does he make money off of it? No? All three of the major pack designers don't make money off of it. They're not "in it for the money".
imthatguyjordan
New Member
Never referred to this community, I referred to the places where money can be made big time ie science.
Sorry for not replying to others, it's late and I need sleep. I shall reply tomorrow. (Haven't really bothered to read other replies. Not trying to sound rude, I am just insanely tired)
ShneekeyTheLost
Too Much Free Time
In addition to being nothing more than tinfoil-hat paranoia, you're aiming your paranoia at the wrong company. If you are wanting to blame Big Oil, use either Haliburton or Schlumberger.
Dear Mr. Kettle. I wish to make remark upon your sable hue. Sincerely, Mr. Pot.
Seriously, vaccinations are good things. Implying that the government is trying to screw with you using them is completely ludicrous.
In the 1300's, the Bubonic Plague killed two-thirds of the European population, because not only did they live in (what we today would consider to be a) fetid, reeking disease-ridden sewer... they were (rather like you are) more interested in their beliefs rather than the facts before them, and ended up killing off the one mitigating factor that could have stemmed the tide somewhat. You see, Bubonic Plague was transmitted by flea bites from infected rats. Cats kill rats, and could have at least spit on the fire and done SOME good, but cats were regarded as witch's familiars and killed en masse. Thus, without a natural predator, the rats grew even more numerous, bringing the plague with them.
Smallpox. A disease completely eradicated in nature. It only exists in little test tubes in carefully controlled labs. It is what I consider to be one of the crowning achievements of the human race as a whole. Why? Vaccinations. This is the disease that exterminated the Native Americans in both North AND in South America. It was also one of the top killers, although not on par with Bubonic Plague, in Europe and elsewhere across the world. This was the disease that gave rise to the concept of vaccination in the first place, and gave humanity a way to fight back against the one vector that has killed more humans than any other cause, indeed than every other cause combined (until the invention of machine guns and poor tactics of WW I).
Polio. This is a debilitating and crippling disease which affects everyone, even Roosevelt was afflicted by it. It is now raising its ugly head after a concerted attempt to put its name next to Smallpox... largely because people in third world countries being ruled by despots have the exact same point of view you do concerning vaccinations, and so now they're getting hit by it. This is a tragedy, because we have the means to exterminate Polio as well, if only they would let us.
Now then, let's go back to Nuclear for a bit.
Your statement, if I understand it correctly, is that Nuclear will spell an end to life as we know it because of accidents like Chernobyl and more recently over in Japan. I would say that these two disasters are the prime reason why your position is completely baseless and false. Chernobyl... "Let's see what happens if we screw around and disable all the safety protocols and disable all the failsafes". And STILL, it wasn't really as bad as people thought it would be. Bad, yes, but not world-ending. Fukishima... being hit by a record shattering 9.1 earthquake is not something anyone can plan for. Yet even in the middle of one of the most population-dense islands on the planet, the actual damage was fairly minimal. If there was any validity to your statement, Japan should now be a dead island. It's not.
Having said that, radioactive isotopes can be used to really hurt people as a weapon of terror. Not particularly lethal compared to weapons we currently have in our inventory, but it is a canker sore when it is used. And it does invoke terror like very few things do. I don't want to keep it out of despots hands because I'm worried about them building nuclear-armed ICBM's, I'm worried about nuclear material being leaked out to terrorist organizations and being used in dirty bombs. You want to see terror? That guy with a vest explosive? Now has vest explosive with Cesium 137. With a half-life of around 30 years, it isn't going away any time soon, cleanup is a PITA, and you're probably going to see more people killed by the terror and stampede than the actual explosive itself, yet it will be FAR more lethal than a conventional vest explosive due to that very same terror and stampede. Fortunately, due to the innate properties of Cesium, you can't exactly put it into a water system (it reacts about like Sodium does to water... only moreso), or it would be a real nightmare.
The problem with nuclear isn't the payload, it's the cleanup that is the problem.
ThatOneSlowking
New Member
*draws pentagram*
You do not draw pentagrams to summon gods
BTW: 13 notifications in less than 25 min I'm on fire today 
I am not a nuclear engineer, but I will say this:
If the scientific community is rejecting something, it is because it is an unfounded pile of garbage. The way science works is that hypotheses are put forth, backed up by evidence, to be evaluated by experts in the relevant field. This is the peer review process. If something fails it, it means there is an error - or a glaring omission - somewhere. If someone elects to forgo this process - as so many of these crackpot ideas inevitably do - it is an indication that the one behind it knows how completely their ideas will be eviscerated by those who actually know what they are talking about.
Contrary to what some people seem to believe, this is why scientific process is so reliable, because some moron with a fake degree from trailer park university cannot simply shove his fever dream through and get it codified into the pool of knowledge. Contrast that with how easily popular opinion can be swayed to the dumbest of ideas with the right application of words like "quantum", "cascade", "polarity", "resonance", and "equilibrium", mixed in with ideas whose origins range from bad science fiction to myths older than the pyramids. Try that on a scientist, and they will quite justifiably make such a strong example of you that your very name will become synonymous with "ignorant" or "liar". Of course, most of these people, when told their "world-changing power source" violates the laws of thermodynamics, or relies on statistical impossibilities, probably take solace in the fact that their idea is in violation of the laws by which the universe operates. To these people, ignorance is a badge of honor.
Noone in the scientific community is "blocking" anything. I personally do some combination of laugh at, ridicule, and pity people who try to make the claim that the only reason [obviously impossible technology X] is seen as fringe science is because of some secret master plan by shadowy figures behind the workings of the world. To claim that the only reason some idea is poorly regarded is because of some concerted effort to hide it is one of the most ridiculous defences imaginable. This is a defence normally only used by the kind of people claiming aliens built the pyramids and are secretly the Queen of England, or that the US government is hiding aliens in Area 51, or the ones who were alleging all sorts of conspiracies - ranging from secret starships to asteroids to "galactic alignment" - whatever the hell that means - to hide the impending end of the world in 2012. You call these secret controllers of the world the "scientific community". Others call the same construct the "NWO". Or the "Illuminati". Or the "Annunaki" (which are alleged to be aliens from Thuban, by the way). The list goes on. And it is all profoundly stupid.
Gee thanks....
thought to be fair my area of expertise is genetics and medicine.... but that's still sciency
You should also ping @King Lemming if we are going to ping the science types
My two cents:
I love science. However I also prefer to keep in mind that "scientific laws" have been proven false before. Generally when scientists find more information. Just because something is true right now doesn't mean it always will be. It just means that at this point in time, the best scientfic minds believe the current evidence supports it. Most science that is changeable though is in the realm of medicine not energy. And that's simply because we do not fully understand many parts of the human body especially the brain. Scientists have a pretty good idea of how energy works and doesn't work.
Personally I prefer science to any other form of belief because it tends to have logic and evidence behind it. But "scientific law" to me means : "no one has managed to disapprove it and there's lots of evidence its correct, absent evidence to the contrary its probably true" But if I followed this conversation correctly y'all are actually talking about something that has been proven incorrect.
As to claims mentioned about scientists being in it for the money. That may hold true for dieticians and food scientists who are paid to make some foods look better then others and then a few years later their claims are found invalid. But energy? Not so much. Scientists that want tons of money make "weight loss shakes" not energy systems
Last edited:
I would just like to point out that revolutions rarely occur except on the boundaries of knowledge, especially in recent memory. More common is refinement. So, for example, we may find that the universe is 13.8, not 13.6 billion years old, or that E=mc^2 has a small correction factor. We are not, however, going to wake up tomorrow and find out that the universe began last week.
Also worth noting is that as these refinements grow smaller, their importance in actual application also does. For example, Newton's law of gravitation is not quite correct; relativity is better. However, the Voyager probes used Newton's laws, as they were close enough (welcome to engineering).
I love this quote.Scientists that want tons of money make "weight loss shakes" not energy systems
