The downside of dependence

Nonsense
thorium1.jpg

Utter nonsense
thorium2.jpg

Pure nonsense
thorium3.jpg

Nonsensical gibberish
thorium4a.jpg

Bilgewater
thorium5.jpg


Original source for all this poppycock.
(The big version is BIG)
 
Last edited:
TFian said:
I'm not talking about TVs
Click to expand...

Instead of telling us what you are not talking about, how about telling us what you are talking about?

I don't know if you are jut having a bad day, or are resentful at the way some people are responding to your posts, or are frustrated by the lack of reception of these ideas in the U.S. or are angry at the short-sidedness of the establishment, but I really must suggest that you step back and reconsider how you are responding to posts in this thread. You are not winning converts and you are closing more minds than you are opening.
 
JadeStonesFromSaturn said:
Hey, TFian, did you see my post I made on Greer? You might be interested in it.
Click to expand...
Thanks for pointing out that post; I hadn't seen it before.

In the interview you quote, Greer says, "The interesting thing is that nobody ever actually proved scientifically that magic doesn't work...." This is funny because recently I was reading about John Dee, who had one foot in science and one in magic. He was working early enough that he didn't even see a conflict, but rather a continuum between divine truths and mundane truths. And yet, we don't see that alleged complementarity anymore, except in the claims of eccentric subcultures.

Does anyone know of any good books about this transition in our thinking, the process by which science showed magic to be superfluous? Perhaps one that disproves Greer's contention above?
 
GreyArea said:
Thanks for pointing out that post; I hadn't seen it before.

In the interview you quote, Greer says, "The interesting thing is that nobody ever actually proved scientifically that magic doesn't work...." This is funny because recently I was reading about John Dee, who had one foot in science and one in magic. He was working early enough that he didn't even see a conflict, but rather a continuum between divine truths and mundane truths. And yet, we don't see that alleged complementarity anymore, except in the claims of eccentric subcultures.

Does anyone know of any good books about this transition in our thinking, the process by which science showed magic to be superfluous? Perhaps one that disproves Greer's contention above?
Click to expand...

Greer would have to make a specific claim that would have a specific test.

UCLA Science, Magic and Religion. 20 hours of lectures. And prof is cute to boot!

Professor Courtenay Raia lectures on science and religion as historical phenomena that have evolved over time. Examines the earlier mind-set before 1700 when into science fitted elements that came eventually to be seen as magical. THe course also question how Western cosmologies became "disenchanted." Magical tradition transformed into modern mysticisms is also examined as well as the political implications of these movements. Includes discussion concerning science in totalitarian settings as well as "big science" during the Cold War.
Click to expand...

Pretty much exactly what you wanted to know?
 
Last edited:
Joey McGee said:
UCLA Science, Magic and Religion. 20 hours of lectures. ...

Pretty much exactly what you wanted to know?
Click to expand...
Yes, I think that will cover it, in spades. Thank you for the link. Have you seen the whole series?

It's great how so many major universities are posting videos of lectures series now. Stanford has several by Leonard Susskind on Physics, which got past me quite early but were still interesting to see. That said, it will be interesting to see Professor Raia's historian perspective on quantum mechanics.

I guess I know how I'll be spending my TV time for the next several weeks. :yikes:
 
Haven't seen yet, I just knew I could find something good for you with my magic Google ninja skills. I am ecstatic that you will enjoy it, and I saved it in my bookmarks. I will eventually find time to watch most of them, a fascinating history of my most cherished subject. Heh, I used to be into magick and mystical science before I ended up a pure naturalist, it will be like going back in time.

http://academicearth.org is the main hub for a lot of these. I currently have "Evolution, Ecology and Behavior" by Stephen Stearns of Yale on the dock, a series with profound implications for the subject of the thread. Just to round out and reinforce my understanding of evolution and the planet. The "Paul Bloom, introduction to psychology" series also has a lot of practical knowledge for people.

Three cheers for the Internet and human solidarity :p
 
TFian said:
Sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_uranium
Click to expand...

From your link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_uranium#Seawater
Unconventional uranium resources include up to 4,000 megatonnes (8,800×109 lb) of uranium contained in sea water.
Click to expand...

Of course the article goes on to say that extraction of uranium from sea water has only been done in the lab. But that's the thing, it has been done in the lab, and while the cost is more than the current cost of mining uranium from conventional resources, it's not prohibitively high:

In 2006 the same research group stated: "If 2g-U/kg-adsorbent is submerged for 60 days at a time and used 6 times, the uranium cost is calculated to be 88,000 yen/kg-U, including the cost of adsorbent production, uranium collection, and uranium purification. When 6g-U/kg-adsorbent and 20 repetitions or more becomes possible, the uranium cost reduces to 15,000 yen. This price level is equivalent to that of the highest cost of the minable uranium. The lowest cost attainable now is 25,000 yen with 4g-U/kg-adsorbent used in the sea area of Okinawa, with 18 repetitionuses. In this case, the initial investment to collect the uranium from seawater is 107.7 billion yen, which is 1/3 of the construction cost of a one million-kilowatt class nuclear power plant."
Click to expand...
 
GreyArea said:
Thanks for pointing out that post; I hadn't seen it before.
Click to expand...

No problem. I think it can be demonstrated a lot of the "Peakniks", both leaders and followers, oftentimes have a reason outside pure empirical observation for their beliefs. Many many I've talked to over the years often have underlying Luddite/naturalist fantasies, or in the case of people like Derrick Jensen, primitivist fantasies. Of course not all are like this, I believe Sharon Astyk (a rising figure in the Peaknik community) is *mostly* simply concerned about the rise of poverty in the United States, and how best for individuals to alleviate it (I don't really agree with her, but I don't think she's as misleading as the "Archdruid")

Also, apparently the person Greer recites as his "evidence", Rupert Sheldrake, has actually had a feud with Randi himself, or at least the institute. Anyone here more knowledgeable about him care to shed some light on it?
 
Last edited:
JadeStonesFromSaturn said:
No problem. I think it can be demonstrated a lot of the "Peakniks", both leaders and followers, oftentimes have a reason outside pure empirical observation for their beliefs. Many many I've talked to over the years often have underlying Luddite/naturalist fantasies, or in the case of people like Derrick Jensen, primitivist fantasies. Of course not all are like this, I believe Sharon Astyk (a rising figure in the Peaknik community) is *mostly* simply concerned about the rise of poverty in the United States, and how best for individuals to alleviate it (I don't really agree with her, but I don't think she's as misleading as the "Archdruid"
Click to expand...
I watched a lecture with a psychic who had gotten some credibility and believers behind him, had to be 200 people watching, when he got to the point about the doomsday scenario where the sun's ejects some stuff and we all go back to the stone age, the room erupted with applause and adulation. They were so happy that there fantasy is going to come true. That's really want they want, for life to be like "The Lord of the Rings"
Also, apparently the person Greer recites as his "evidence, Rupert Sheldrake has actually had a feud with Randi himself, or at least the institute. Anyone here more knowledgeable about him care to shed some light on it?
Click to expand...
Sheldrake repeats all of the same old crap about Randi probably not having the money or offering an objective test. There was something Randi said about his dog experiments, I found a post to explain. There many posts and threads on sheldrake if you use the search function :)
 
Roboramma said:
From your link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_uranium#Seawater


Of course the article goes on to say that extraction of uranium from sea water has only been done in the lab. But that's the thing, it has been done in the lab, and while the cost is more than the current cost of mining uranium from conventional resources, it's not prohibitively high:
Click to expand...

The energy density of nuclear is so high that it changes all the rules. Unlike fossil fuels, the fuel costs of nuclear are the smallest cost involved.

The tests on seawater uranium show an initial cost of 300$ per kilogram and that's without future refinements of the technology or mass production and economies of scale kicking in.

Nuclear energy is cost effective up to a price of 7,000$ per kilogram. You could quarry granite as you would for normal uses of granite, crush it and draw out the trace amounts of uranium and nuclear power would still be competitive.
 
Joey McGee said:
I watched a lecture with a psychic who had gotten some credibility and believers behind him, had to be 200 people watching, when he got to the point about the doomsday scenario where the sun's ejects some stuff and we all go back to the stone age, the room erupted with applause and adulation. They were so happy that there fantasy is going to come true. That's really want they want, for life to be like "The Lord of the Rings"
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the impression I've gotten over the years from the Peakniks as well. Peak oil's just their latest doomsday scenario they use to project their fantasies onto. A prominent peaknik, James Howard Kunstler, projects all kinds of doomsday scenarios for the US (and the world), but if you read deep enough, you can tell they're generally a lurid fantasy of his. He wants to see a return to "small town America", and uses peakoil as a means to project that fantasy into reality. Before Peak Oil, he did the same thing with Y2K. I wonder if Greer used another popular doomsday belief as a return to "The good ol agrarian days".

Joey McGee said:
Sheldrake repeats all of the same old crap about Randi probably not having the money or offering an objective test. There was something Randi said about his dog experiments, I found a post to explain. There many posts and threads on sheldrake if you use the search function :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, I'll check it out.

Does anyone know though what Greer is talking about when Sheldrake put science to "it's own test" and having it fail miserably? I can't seem to find any reference to that exact "test".
 
Another nail in TFians doomsday fantasies coffin:

Two factors work very much in favor of uranium being economically viable at much higher prices. The first is that energy content per unit of weight is very high. For example, 1 kg of uranium has as much potential energy as 2,300,000 liters of gasoline.

The second is that the price of uranium when converted to other forms of energy, such as electricity, is a very small part of the retail price. For example, at a U3O8 (yellow cake) price of about US$70/kg [UC, Oct 2005] the raw material cost of the uranium to produce electricity in thermal reactors is about US$0.0015/kWh [Pendergast, 1990]. If the price of U3O8 were to increase 100 fold to US$7,000/kg, the price of electricity would increase by about US$0.15/kWh, which compares with the current retail price of electricity in North America being US$0.05 to US$0.15/kWh. Thus, if the current price increased even that dramatically, the price of electricity would increase to US$0.20 to US$0.30/kWh, which would be manageable.

However, with fast reactors that “burn” virtually all of the uranium, even if U3O8 increased in price about 200 times from US$70/kg to the current price of gold at US$14,000/kg, the fuel cost for electricity generated by nuclear fission breeder reactors would be less than US$0.003/kWh.

At US$14,000/kg, immense quantities of uranium in crustal deposits would become economically viable. For example, one tonne of current low grade ore [WNA, 2004] at 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of uranium would contain 1 kg of uranium with a selling price of US$14,000. It is likely that enough uranium would be available to power the world for as far into the future as today is from the day more than 10,000 years ago when civilization dawned. This would require about 40-50 times more uranium than the IPCC estimate in Line 2 of Table 2.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom