Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #390147 > unrolled thread
| Started by | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-16 15:04 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-08-19 07:45 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 68 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 15:04 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-17 06:56 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-18 08:04 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 13:51 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-19 06:30 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-18 16:55 -0400
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-20 08:29 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-20 06:12 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-21 08:59 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-21 06:51 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-21 19:19 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 04:35 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-22 06:34 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-21 22:50 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-23 06:14 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-23 22:38 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-24 11:19 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-24 07:37 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-25 04:23 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-25 04:26 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-25 22:14 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-27 08:29 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-27 10:01 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-29 05:36 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-29 03:55 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-29 20:24 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-30 21:34 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-31 06:46 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-31 09:17 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-01 19:51 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-01 18:26 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-02 11:50 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-01 21:04 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-03 09:07 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-03 07:05 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-04 07:52 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-04 05:20 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-05 09:20 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-05 22:04 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-06 09:22 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-09-05 20:34 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-06 07:15 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-07 05:23 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-06 22:15 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-09-08 13:07 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-08 22:24 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-09-09 08:43 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-09 06:53 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 07:28 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-10 01:07 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-11 00:08 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-09 06:50 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-10 06:16 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-09 19:21 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-09-10 13:23 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-10 03:58 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 07:39 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-12 06:11 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-25 07:55 +0200
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 17:59 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-22 03:35 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-23 06:19 +1000
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 17:42 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 17:38 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 16:37 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:33 -0500
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 18:42 -0700
Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-08-19 07:45 +0200
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-16 15:04 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Tom Roberts' Proposed Experiments to Detect RoS |
| Message-ID | <1921af28-91fb-49a1-bac2-4c69acd464b1@googlegroups.com> |
On Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 3:32:18 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 3:47:14 PM UTC-6, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > Am 09.08.2016 13:37, schrieb Gary Harnagel: > > > > > > > The concept of paid schools is kind of alien in the German society. > > > > Usually public schools and universities are free. > > > > > > Are you implying that German teachers work for free? :-) > > > > Sure, the teachers get paid. But pupils do not pay. > > Of course they do, or their parents do. You seem to have an entitlement > attitude. > > > The reason: schools are among those public services, people usually > > expect in return for their taxes. > > Exactly, so people do indeed pay for schooling. You seem to have an > entitlement attitude. > > > There are also no fees for highways, bridges or tunnels, since the > > streets have already been paid by the taxpayer. > > Which means people pay for those services. You seem to have an entitlement > attitude. No. The concept of paying fees (esp. high fees) for education is singularly modern-American. People in the US very quickly forgot that their public colleges were either free or nearly free about 50 years ago, e.g. UC Berkeley. So now when an old politician comes up with the (obvious to him) idea to return to what used to be the standard (and remains so everywhere else), he sounds like he lost his mind (yes, I'm talking about Sanders). Why students here tolerate this situation is another interesting story, perhaps worth a PhD in American psyche. Remember few years ago France was toying with the idea of introducing tuition fees? There were huge marches in the streets and the idea got quickly buried. Another interesting question is why Americans even bother to go to American colleges today when they can easily go to colleges in Germany for free with the credits transferred back home automatically? It seems it's a psychological barrier (unless we're talking very US-specific professions like medicine or law). > > To charge entrance fees for schools would be a little unfair for the kids. > > > > TH > > When I went to elementary school, my parents paid the "tuition" directly. Yeah, when you go to a doctor in the US, you pay the "copay" too. It's a ludicrous system. -- Jan
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-17 06:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e1i94fF5cqkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390147 |
Am 17.08.2016 00:04, schrieb JanPB: >>>>> The concept of paid schools is kind of alien in the German society. >>>>> Usually public schools and universities are free. >>>> >>>> Are you implying that German teachers work for free? :-) >>> >>> Sure, the teachers get paid. But pupils do not pay. >> >> Of course they do, or their parents do. You seem to have an entitlement >> attitude. >> >>> The reason: schools are among those public services, people usually >>> expect in return for their taxes. >> >> Exactly, so people do indeed pay for schooling. You seem to have an >> entitlement attitude. >> >>> There are also no fees for highways, bridges or tunnels, since the >>> streets have already been paid by the taxpayer. >> >> Which means people pay for those services. You seem to have an entitlement >> attitude. > > No. The concept of paying fees (esp. high fees) for education is singularly > modern-American. People in the US very quickly forgot that their public > colleges were either free or nearly free about 50 years ago, e.g. UC Berkeley. > > So now when an old politician comes up with the (obvious to him) idea to return > to what used to be the standard (and remains so everywhere else), he sounds > like he lost his mind (yes, I'm talking about Sanders). > > Why students here tolerate this situation is another interesting story, > perhaps worth a PhD in American psyche. Remember few years ago France was > toying with the idea of introducing tuition fees? There were huge marches in > the streets and the idea got quickly buried. The answer is simple. The higher education in the USA is only a part of the system, how privileges are maintained and distributed among the society. In other countries you could go to a collage, if you are smart and work hard enough. Not so in the United States, since here distribution of chances is bound to relations to certain 'in-groups'. So we have influential groups, which try to promote the life of their own breed (on the expense of other groups). And the wealthy plutocrats want education to be expensive, since they have money and others havn't. But other groups and lower ranks of the same groups have similar interests, so nobody complains. Those who do in fact complain, have no voice, that is heard very far, since they have no collage degree. So we have a magnificently stabilized society, where the rich get richer and the middle class tends to get homeless or have a carrier as trolley-pusher at Walmart. Large fees also require loans of some kinds, since not everybody can pay the collage fees from what they have saved. This debts are a burden, what enables to apply pressure upon former students. This pressure is apparently used by these plutocrats, to fill the ranks of their own 'in-group' by yet another bunch of willing helpers, that want to promote their agenda. So we see, how everybody is profiting from such a system and once you complain, you're out. 'Being out' means, your 'in-group' kicks you out and that would equal to a career as burger flipper instead of that as Wall-Street-tycoon. So, people have the choice: card board box or mansion. Just sign here at the dotted line.... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 08:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e1l1fqFpbr2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390169 |
Am 17.08.2016 06:56, schrieb Thomas Heger: > Am 17.08.2016 00:04, schrieb JanPB: > >>>>>> The concept of paid schools is kind of alien in the German society. >>>>>> Usually public schools and universities are free. >>>>> >>>>> Are you implying that German teachers work for free? :-) >>>> >>>> Sure, the teachers get paid. But pupils do not pay. >>> >>> Of course they do, or their parents do. You seem to have an entitlement >>> attitude. >>> >>>> The reason: schools are among those public services, people usually >>>> expect in return for their taxes. >>> >>> Exactly, so people do indeed pay for schooling. You seem to have an >>> entitlement attitude. >>> >>>> There are also no fees for highways, bridges or tunnels, since the >>>> streets have already been paid by the taxpayer. >>> >>> Which means people pay for those services. You seem to have an >>> entitlement >>> attitude. >> >> No. The concept of paying fees (esp. high fees) for education is >> singularly >> modern-American. People in the US very quickly forgot that their public >> colleges were either free or nearly free about 50 years ago, e.g. UC >> Berkeley. >> >> So now when an old politician comes up with the (obvious to him) idea >> to return >> to what used to be the standard (and remains so everywhere else), he >> sounds >> like he lost his mind (yes, I'm talking about Sanders). >> >> Why students here tolerate this situation is another interesting story, >> perhaps worth a PhD in American psyche. Remember few years ago France was >> toying with the idea of introducing tuition fees? There were huge >> marches in >> the streets and the idea got quickly buried. > > > The answer is simple. > > The higher education in the USA is only a part of the system, how > privileges are maintained and distributed among the society. > > In other countries you could go to a collage, if you are smart and work > hard enough. Not so in the United States, since here distribution of > chances is bound to relations to certain 'in-groups'. > > So we have influential groups, which try to promote the life of their > own breed (on the expense of other groups). And the wealthy plutocrats > want education to be expensive, since they have money and others havn't. > > But other groups and lower ranks of the same groups have similar > interests, so nobody complains. > > Those who do in fact complain, have no voice, that is heard very far, > since they have no collage degree. > > So we have a magnificently stabilized society, where the rich get richer > and the middle class tends to get homeless or have a carrier as > trolley-pusher at Walmart. > > Large fees also require loans of some kinds, since not everybody can pay > the collage fees from what they have saved. > > This debts are a burden, what enables to apply pressure upon former > students. This pressure is apparently used by these plutocrats, to fill > the ranks of their own 'in-group' by yet another bunch of willing > helpers, that want to promote their agenda. > > So we see, how everybody is profiting from such a system and once you > complain, you're out. > > 'Being out' means, your 'in-group' kicks you out and that would equal to > a career as burger flipper instead of that as Wall-Street-tycoon. > > So, people have the choice: card board box or mansion. > > Just sign here at the dotted line.... > The US system is actually form of socialism, since it is neither money nor personal efforts, what brings people further, but being born into certain groups. The core of socialism is actually not 'equal rights and to promote the life of the working man', but socialism is 'elitism' of the non-elected class, who call themselves 'avantgarde'. But they could call themselves 'aristocrats' or 'elite' or whatever, as long as they keep the chances of life among their peers. Only problem: this system is extremely dangerous for the welfare of the society in total. E.g. the USA cannot restrict chances to the offspring of the plutocrats, since large countries like Russia, India and China don't do that. So the USA would loose competition, if they would not develop human resources, wherever possible. So if US people do not want to live under authority of the Peoples Party of China and see their country being overrun by Chinese with Ph.d., they would better invest in education. It is so scandalous, that the USA maintains the largest Army in the world and carries out unnecessary conflicts in unimportant parts of the world, while the own infrastructure rots and the schools and collages demand high fees. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 13:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <np502v$1if2$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390169 |
On 8/16/2016 11:56 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: > The answer is simple. > > The higher education in the USA is only a part of the system, how > privileges are maintained and distributed among the society. > > In other countries you could go to a collage, if you are smart and work > hard enough. Not so in the United States, since here distribution of > chances is bound to relations to certain 'in-groups'. > > So we have influential groups, which try to promote the life of their > own breed (on the expense of other groups). And the wealthy plutocrats > want education to be expensive, since they have money and others havn't. > > But other groups and lower ranks of the same groups have similar > interests, so nobody complains. > > Those who do in fact complain, have no voice, that is heard very far, > since they have no collage degree. > > So we have a magnificently stabilized society, where the rich get richer > and the middle class tends to get homeless or have a carrier as > trolley-pusher at Walmart. > > Large fees also require loans of some kinds, since not everybody can pay > the collage fees from what they have saved. > > This debts are a burden, what enables to apply pressure upon former > students. This pressure is apparently used by these plutocrats, to fill > the ranks of their own 'in-group' by yet another bunch of willing > helpers, that want to promote their agenda. > > So we see, how everybody is profiting from such a system and once you > complain, you're out. > > 'Being out' means, your 'in-group' kicks you out and that would equal to > a career as burger flipper instead of that as Wall-Street-tycoon. > > So, people have the choice: card board box or mansion. > > Just sign here at the dotted line.... > > > TH This sounds a little like sour grapes to me. If you are German, then your complaints about the US educational fee system are irrelevant to you. You could be indulging in free college education in physics in Germany. But for some reason, you do not do this, and somehow American policy about education is at fault for that? As for your comments about the US, it is absolutely true that America is the land of opportunity, but that opportunity is not served on a platter of state-sponsored entitlement. Here, advancement requires personal investment. I am a woodworker. Nobody offered me a job in a state-sponsored woodworking shop. I had to buy or make my own tools, I had to build my own client list, I had to find my own wood suppliers. In the first few years of my business, I operated at a net loss while making those investments. This is also common for restaurant owners, auto repair shops, and any number of other vocations. Taking a career in a specialized area like law or medicine or engineering or architecture or science is no different. You're going to be operating at a net loss for a while until there is return on your advancement. I don't think this is intended to separate classes of people, since I don't few restaurant owners as being any more "high class" than anyone else. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 06:30 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <np55sp$1s3k$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390286 |
On 19/08/16 04:51, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/16/2016 11:56 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: >> >> TH > > This sounds a little like sour grapes to me. If you are German, then > your complaints about the US educational fee system are irrelevant to > you. You could be indulging in free college education in physics in > Germany. But for some reason, you do not do this, and somehow > American policy about education is at fault for that? > > As for your comments about the US, it is absolutely true that America > is the land of opportunity, but that opportunity is not served on a > platter of state-sponsored entitlement. Here, advancement requires > personal investment. I am a woodworker. Nobody offered me a job in a > state-sponsored woodworking shop. I had to buy or make my own tools, > I had to build my own client list, I had to find my own wood > suppliers. In the first few years of my business, I operated at a net > loss while making those investments. This is also common for > restaurant owners, auto repair shops, and any number of other > vocations. Taking a career in a specialized area like law or medicine > or engineering or architecture or science is no different. You're > going to be operating at a net loss for a while until there is return > on your advancement. I don't think this is intended to separate > classes of people, since I don't few restaurant owners as being any > more "high class" than anyone else. This might contain an element of truth but you overlook a vital factor. Where does a person obtain the initial training and capital that will enable him or her to eventually work for themselves if they so desire? Some are lucky enough to have rich parents who can pay for their education and provide an inheritance but most are not that lucky. Traditionally and in many countries, government institutions provided wide ranging opportunities for young people to learn trades and professions by way of lowly paid scholarships and apprenticeships. These training grounds were taken away by the Regan/Thatcher right wing fanaticism that forced the worldwide privatization of all those often highly efficient government organizations that competed in some way with the big multinational companies or which were breeding grounds for socialistic views. We are now paying for that insane campaign by way of massive youth unemployment and demoralization in just about every capitalist country on earth along with a general collapse of business ethics and overall living standards. The USA and even my country have now become very unhappy places for about ninety percent of their population through chronic lack of security. Whilst private enterprise is to be encouraged and fully supported, a little bit of socialism is vital for setting standards and providing secure jobs for school leavers in particular. Private organizations cannot afford to train young people any more and offer little security of employment for even top employees...whilst at hte same time, company directors are ripping off the public by paying themselves ridiculously high salaries.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 16:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57b620c7$0$37246$b1db1813$19ace300@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #390295 |
On 8/18/2016 4:30 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > On 19/08/16 04:51, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 8/16/2016 11:56 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: > >>> >>> TH >> >> This sounds a little like sour grapes to me. If you are German, then >> your complaints about the US educational fee system are irrelevant to >> you. You could be indulging in free college education in physics in >> Germany. But for some reason, you do not do this, and somehow >> American policy about education is at fault for that? >> >> As for your comments about the US, it is absolutely true that America >> is the land of opportunity, but that opportunity is not served on a >> platter of state-sponsored entitlement. Here, advancement requires >> personal investment. I am a woodworker. Nobody offered me a job in a >> state-sponsored woodworking shop. I had to buy or make my own tools, >> I had to build my own client list, I had to find my own wood >> suppliers. In the first few years of my business, I operated at a net >> loss while making those investments. This is also common for >> restaurant owners, auto repair shops, and any number of other >> vocations. Taking a career in a specialized area like law or medicine >> or engineering or architecture or science is no different. You're >> going to be operating at a net loss for a while until there is return >> on your advancement. I don't think this is intended to separate >> classes of people, since I don't few restaurant owners as being any >> more "high class" than anyone else. > > This might contain an element of truth but you overlook a vital factor. > Where does a person obtain the initial training and capital that will > enable him or her to eventually work for themselves if they so desire? > Some are lucky enough to have rich parents who can pay for their > education and provide an inheritance but most are not that lucky. > Traditionally and in many countries, government institutions provided > wide ranging opportunities for young people to learn trades and > professions by way of lowly paid scholarships and apprenticeships. These > training grounds were taken away by the Regan/Thatcher right wing > fanaticism that forced the worldwide privatization of all those often > highly efficient government organizations that competed in some way with > the big multinational companies or which were breeding grounds for > socialistic views. We are now paying for that insane campaign by way of > massive youth unemployment and demoralization in just about every > capitalist country on earth along with a general collapse of business > ethics and overall living standards. The USA and even my country have > now become very unhappy places for about ninety percent of their > population through chronic lack of security. > Whilst private enterprise is to be encouraged and fully supported, a > little bit of socialism is vital for setting standards and providing > secure jobs for school leavers in particular. Private organizations > cannot afford to train young people any more and offer little security > of employment for even top employees...whilst at hte same time, company > directors are ripping off the public by paying themselves ridiculously > high salaries. > > Oh my! Sounds like an academic commie to me! Hey, HGW, didn't you get the memo about your USSR Utopia? The biggest social experiment in the history of the world ended up as a massive FAIL. And that after the murder of hundreds of millions of innocents in a futile attempt to keep it going. Hillary as president will be the last chance to show this system can actually work (if only run by the "right" people). Don't hold your breath.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 08:29 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <np818m$5u1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390299 |
On 19/08/16 06:55, benj wrote: > On 8/18/2016 4:30 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: >> On 19/08/16 04:51, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 8/16/2016 11:56 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: >> >>>> >>>> TH >>> >>> This sounds a little like sour grapes to me. If you are German, then >>> your complaints about the US educational fee system are irrelevant to >>> you. You could be indulging in free college education in physics in >>> Germany. But for some reason, you do not do this, and somehow >>> American policy about education is at fault for that? >>> >>> As for your comments about the US, it is absolutely true that America >>> is the land of opportunity, but that opportunity is not served on a >>> platter of state-sponsored entitlement. Here, advancement requires >>> personal investment. I am a woodworker. Nobody offered me a job in a >>> state-sponsored woodworking shop. I had to buy or make my own tools, >>> I had to build my own client list, I had to find my own wood >>> suppliers. In the first few years of my business, I operated at a net >>> loss while making those investments. This is also common for >>> restaurant owners, auto repair shops, and any number of other >>> vocations. Taking a career in a specialized area like law or medicine >>> or engineering or architecture or science is no different. You're >>> going to be operating at a net loss for a while until there is return >>> on your advancement. I don't think this is intended to separate >>> classes of people, since I don't few restaurant owners as being any >>> more "high class" than anyone else. >> >> This might contain an element of truth but you overlook a vital factor. >> Where does a person obtain the initial training and capital that will >> enable him or her to eventually work for themselves if they so desire? >> Some are lucky enough to have rich parents who can pay for their >> education and provide an inheritance but most are not that lucky. >> Traditionally and in many countries, government institutions provided >> wide ranging opportunities for young people to learn trades and >> professions by way of lowly paid scholarships and apprenticeships. These >> training grounds were taken away by the Regan/Thatcher right wing >> fanaticism that forced the worldwide privatization of all those often >> highly efficient government organizations that competed in some way with >> the big multinational companies or which were breeding grounds for >> socialistic views. We are now paying for that insane campaign by way of >> massive youth unemployment and demoralization in just about every >> capitalist country on earth along with a general collapse of business >> ethics and overall living standards. The USA and even my country have >> now become very unhappy places for about ninety percent of their >> population through chronic lack of security. >> Whilst private enterprise is to be encouraged and fully supported, a >> little bit of socialism is vital for setting standards and providing >> secure jobs for school leavers in particular. Private organizations >> cannot afford to train young people any more and offer little security >> of employment for even top employees...whilst at hte same time, company >> directors are ripping off the public by paying themselves ridiculously >> high salaries. >> >> > Oh my! Sounds like an academic commie to me! Idiot, I'm a Trump supporter. Hey, HGW, didn't you get > the memo about your USSR Utopia? The biggest social experiment in the > history of the world ended up as a massive FAIL. And that after the > murder of hundreds of millions of innocents in a futile attempt to keep > it going. Hillary as president will be the last chance to show this > system can actually work (if only run by the "right" people). Don't hold > your breath. She's a nice girl but promises just more of the same. The USA is a crap country...and for many years it has been forcing its crap onto the rest of the world. Donald will fix that by bringing things to a head and causing the final collapse of mankind....a very good result.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 06:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e1q3ldF1aa3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390398 |
Am 20.08.2016 00:29, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: >>> Whilst private enterprise is to be encouraged and fully supported, a >>> little bit of socialism is vital for setting standards and providing >>> secure jobs for school leavers in particular. Private organizations >>> cannot afford to train young people any more and offer little security >>> of employment for even top employees...whilst at hte same time, company >>> directors are ripping off the public by paying themselves ridiculously >>> high salaries. >>> >>> >> Oh my! Sounds like an academic commie to me! > > Idiot, I'm a Trump supporter. > > Hey, HGW, didn't you get >> the memo about your USSR Utopia? The biggest social experiment in the >> history of the world ended up as a massive FAIL. And that after the >> murder of hundreds of millions of innocents in a futile attempt to keep >> it going. Hillary as president will be the last chance to show this >> system can actually work (if only run by the "right" people). Don't hold >> your breath. > > She's a nice girl but promises just more of the same. The USA is a crap > country...and for many years it has been forcing its crap onto the rest > of the world. Donald will fix that by bringing things to a head and > causing the final collapse of mankind....a very good result. > I don't think so. The main reason: Trump does not want to become president. Actually Hillary is the scheduled next president and that was planned to promote certain steps of the 'bad guys' agenda. There was a similar pattern in the first election of Obama. McCain made it quite well, so Sarah Palin was taken from the Alaska wilderness, to mimic the political idiot. This was according to plan, since Obama was planned as next president already. McCain is a questionable person, nevertheless, as we can see in his appearances in the Ukraine. But he once was the hope of conservative Americans. To cut down these hopes and for further destruction of the US middle class the Indonesian actor Barry Soetoro was hired and presented as Barack Obama. But they can put a puppet into the Oval Office, since the president does not decide anything. He has to wake up at 6 am and is then carried around to various places, guarded at any single instant and has to act like told. Why would a billionair like to have such a nasty job? Answer: he does not. Only it should look like at least somehow democratic, what is actually pre-planned. And Trump has to play the part of the alternative, who - unfortunately - has not made it. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 08:59 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npanbl$1q7n$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390426 |
On 20/08/16 14:12, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 20.08.2016 00:29, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: >>>> >>> Oh my! Sounds like an academic commie to me! >> >> Idiot, I'm a Trump supporter. >> She's a nice girl but promises just more of the same. The USA is a >> crap country...and for many years it has been forcing its crap onto >> the rest of the world. Donald will fix that by bringing things to a >> head and causing the final collapse of mankind....a very good >> result. >> > > I don't think so. > > The main reason: Trump does not want to become president. > > Actually Hillary is the scheduled next president and that was planned > to promote certain steps of the 'bad guys' agenda. > > There was a similar pattern in the first election of Obama. McCain > made it quite well, so Sarah Palin was taken from the Alaska > wilderness, to mimic the political idiot. > > This was according to plan, since Obama was planned as next president > already. > > McCain is a questionable person, nevertheless, as we can see in his > appearances in the Ukraine. > > But he once was the hope of conservative Americans. > > To cut down these hopes and for further destruction of the US middle > class the Indonesian actor Barry Soetoro was hired and presented as > Barack Obama. > > But they can put a puppet into the Oval Office, since the president > does not decide anything. He has to wake up at 6 am and is then > carried around to various places, guarded at any single instant and > has to act like told. > > Why would a billionair like to have such a nasty job? > > Answer: he does not. > > Only it should look like at least somehow democratic, what is > actually pre-planned. And Trump has to play the part of the > alternative, who - unfortunately - has not made it. Well you could be right ....but it will be a pity if he doesn't get in. I want to see the human race wipe itself out as quickly as possible so normal life on this planet can start all over again. > TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 06:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e1sqbbFkp2kU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390462 |
Am 21.08.2016 00:59, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: ... >> Only it should look like at least somehow democratic, what is >> actually pre-planned. And Trump has to play the part of the >> alternative, who - unfortunately - has not made it. > > Well you could be right ....but it will be a pity if he doesn't get in. > I want to see the human race wipe itself out as quickly as possible so > normal life on this planet can start all over again. I'm actually against your proposal. So I do not want mankind to wipe out itself. This has to do with - mainly - personal reasons, since this 'wipe-out' would certainly have an effect upon people, that I have a relation to and which I would eventually miss. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 19:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npbrmc$13dg$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390472 |
On 21/08/16 14:51, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 21.08.2016 00:59, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: ... >>> Only it should look like at least somehow democratic, what is >>> actually pre-planned. And Trump has to play the part of the >>> alternative, who - unfortunately - has not made it. >> >> Well you could be right ....but it will be a pity if he doesn't get >> in. I want to see the human race wipe itself out as quickly as >> possible so normal life on this planet can start all over again. > > I'm actually against your proposal. > > So I do not want mankind to wipe out itself. > > This has to do with - mainly - personal reasons, since this > 'wipe-out' would certainly have an effect upon people, that I have a > relation to and which I would eventually miss. Civilization is on the verge of collapse....mainly because of the existence of religion. The Earth is vastly overpopulated and has reached breaking point. There is no decent future for anyone alive today.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 04:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1db95741-aaed-4dfe-9b28-9d2a8953f79c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #390478 |
On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 3:19:11 AM UTC-6, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > > Civilization is on the verge of collapse....mainly because of the > existence of religion. Baloney! ISIS is a joke in that respect, a little popgun. If things blow up in the Middle East, it will be because of power-hungry nations. > The Earth is vastly overpopulated and has reached breaking point. Then go live in the Outback. There are many places that are greatly under- populated, all that is needed is energy - and we know how to get that. > There is no decent future for anyone alive today. Speak for yourself, nihilist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-22 06:34 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npd38o$vr0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390490 |
On 21/08/16 21:35, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 3:19:11 AM UTC-6, HGWilson, DSc. > wrote: >> >> Civilization is on the verge of collapse....mainly because of the >> existence of religion. > > Baloney! ISIS is a joke in that respect, a little popgun. If > things blow up in the Middle East, it will be because of > power-hungry nations. What do you mean IF? It couldn't be much worse than it is already! Don't you get any news in your shit country? >> The Earth is vastly overpopulated and has reached breaking point. > > Then go live in the Outback. There are many places that are greatly > under- populated, all that is needed is energy - and we know how to > get that. Idiot! Have you heard of something called 'water'? Have you heard of soil salinity? Have you heard that phosphates are running out? Have you heard anything beyond what some poofy pedophile preacher tells you? >> There is no decent future for anyone alive today. > > Speak for yourself, nihilist. I suppose you're one of those idiots who thinks something called a 'god' is maintaining this planet as a playground for his sadistic games.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e1uigrF3o8oU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390508 |
Am 21.08.2016 22:34, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: >>> The Earth is vastly overpopulated and has reached breaking point. >> >> Then go live in the Outback. There are many places that are greatly >> under- populated, all that is needed is energy - and we know how to >> get that. > > Idiot! Have you heard of something called 'water'? Have you heard of > soil salinity? Have you heard that phosphates are running out? > Have you heard anything beyond what some poofy pedophile preacher tells > you? The only one substance on planet Earth, which is truly abundant: that is water. The problem is not water itself, but water without salt. Serious problems emerge, because the oceans are so polluted. But still there is enough water. Question is, how to get the salt out. There are also regions, which way too much rain or snow. So even fresh water is quite a lot. Only this water is not evenly distributed. So future generations will have to solve certain problems with litter, salt and distribution. But a few problems are not a reason to commit suicide. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 06:14 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npfmf3$rur$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390510 |
On 22/08/16 06:50, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 21.08.2016 22:34, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: > >>>> The Earth is vastly overpopulated and has reached breaking point. >>> >>> Then go live in the Outback. There are many places that are greatly >>> under- populated, all that is needed is energy - and we know how to >>> get that. >> >> Idiot! Have you heard of something called 'water'? Have you heard of >> soil salinity? Have you heard that phosphates are running out? >> Have you heard anything beyond what some poofy pedophile preacher tells >> you? > > > The only one substance on planet Earth, which is truly abundant: that is > water. > > > The problem is not water itself, but water without salt. GAWD! You're brilliant. > Serious problems emerge, because the oceans are so polluted. But > still there is enough water. > > Question is, how to get the salt out. That takes ENERGY...lot of it! > There are also regions, which way too much rain or snow. So even fresh > water is quite a lot. The Earth's glaciers are melting rapidly...and regions that rely on the annual melting are very concerned. When the glaciers go, much of China and Europe will be without fresh water. > Only this water is not evenly distributed. > > So future generations will have to solve certain problems with litter, > salt and distribution. there is no solution. Human bodies are the worst form of litter on this planet. > But a few problems are not a reason to commit suicide. then why is humanity hellbent on doing it? > > > TH >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 22:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e23qimFc3mtU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390591 |
Am 22.08.2016 22:14, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: >>> Idiot! Have you heard of something called 'water'? Have you heard of >>> soil salinity? Have you heard that phosphates are running out? >>> Have you heard anything beyond what some poofy pedophile preacher tells >>> you? >> >> >> The only one substance on planet Earth, which is truly abundant: that is >> water. >> >> >> The problem is not water itself, but water without salt. > > GAWD! You're brilliant. > >> Serious problems emerge, because the oceans are so polluted. But >> still there is enough water. >> >> Question is, how to get the salt out. > > That takes ENERGY...lot of it! Well, yes. But energy isn't a big problem neither. It is a problem, but not of the kind, which could not be solved. So, now (cheap!) energy sources are required, which enable to de-salt huge amounts of sea-water. Should be possible, but I actually do not to speculate about the details. >> There are also regions, which way too much rain or snow. So even fresh >> water is quite a lot. > > The Earth's glaciers are melting rapidly...and regions that rely on the > annual melting are very concerned. When the glaciers go, much of China > and Europe will be without fresh water. I assume, that actually 'Growing Earth' is responsible for this effect. Growth is turning former sea-floor into marshes and former marshes to planes and that into deserts in the mountains. So Chinese deserts like Gobi or Lop Nor were formerly lakes or internal seas, but are now deserts in mountain ranges. This is - unfortunately - a consequence of 'Growing Earth'. Central Europe will also be a desert one day, but fortunately this will take a few million years. There's not much hope in such a situation, since humans have no influence upon Earth' interior, hence cannot stop the process itself. But since Growth means also new land, there is kind of compensation for land lost to the deserts. >> Only this water is not evenly distributed. >> >> So future generations will have to solve certain problems with litter, >> salt and distribution. > > there is no solution. Human bodies are the worst form of litter on this > planet. > >> But a few problems are not a reason to commit suicide. > > then why is humanity hellbent on doing it? Don#t know, maybe they watch too much tv. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 11:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npismj$1jm3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390677 |
On 24/08/16 06:38, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 22.08.2016 22:14, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: >>> Question is, how to get the salt out. >> >> That takes ENERGY...lot of it! > Well, yes. But energy isn't a big problem neither. It is a problem, but > not of the kind, which could not be solved. > > So, now (cheap!) energy sources are required, which enable to de-salt > huge amounts of sea-water. > > Should be possible, but I actually do not to speculate about the details. Have you heard of Dubai? It has been using oil for desalination but its reserves are now running out. Right now, 3,000,000 people live in inhospitable desert. What do you think will happen to them without energy? Incidentally, Dubai has no sewerage system an has to cart all waste into a remote spot in the desert where it is dumped. >>> There are also regions, which way too much rain or snow. So even fresh >>> water is quite a lot. >> >> The Earth's glaciers are melting rapidly...and regions that rely on the >> annual melting are very concerned. When the glaciers go, much of China >> and Europe will be without fresh water. > > I assume, that actually 'Growing Earth' is responsible for this effect. > > Growth is turning former sea-floor into marshes and former marshes to > planes and that into deserts in the mountains. Land clearing and temperature rise are the main problem. The only sensible solution is a massive reduction in the human population. > So Chinese deserts like Gobi or Lop Nor were formerly lakes or internal > seas, but are now deserts in mountain ranges. This is - unfortunately - > a consequence of 'Growing Earth'. > > Central Europe will also be a desert one day, but fortunately this will > take a few million years. It is more likely to experience another ice age before then. > There's not much hope in such a situation, since humans have no > influence upon Earth' interior, hence cannot stop the process itself. The Earth's interior is not to blame. The problems are mainly due to human activity. > But since Growth means also new land, there is kind of compensation for > land lost to the deserts. There is no more land available and much of its production is dependent on dwindling water and phosphate reserves. Whilst there is a surplus of food rigth now, it is only a matter of time before a droung or flood >>> Only this water is not evenly distributed. > TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 07:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e24q51FispvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #390711 |
Am 24.08.2016 03:19, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: >>>> Question is, how to get the salt out. >>> >>> That takes ENERGY...lot of it! > >> Well, yes. But energy isn't a big problem neither. It is a problem, but >> not of the kind, which could not be solved. >> >> So, now (cheap!) energy sources are required, which enable to de-salt >> huge amounts of sea-water. >> >> Should be possible, but I actually do not to speculate about the details. > > Have you heard of Dubai? It has been using oil for desalination but its > reserves are now running out. Right now, 3,000,000 people live in > inhospitable desert. What do you think will happen to them without > energy? Incidentally, Dubai has no sewerage system an has to cart all > waste into a remote spot in the desert where it is dumped. I have heard about a process called 'reverted osmosis', which allows to desalt water. Possibly the Dubains could buy a few of these machines and create desalted water. As possible energy source they have actually the sun, which shines a lot in Dubai. >>>> There are also regions, which way too much rain or snow. So even fresh >>>> water is quite a lot. >>> >>> The Earth's glaciers are melting rapidly...and regions that rely on the >>> annual melting are very concerned. When the glaciers go, much of China >>> and Europe will be without fresh water. >> >> I assume, that actually 'Growing Earth' is responsible for this effect. >> >> Growth is turning former sea-floor into marshes and former marshes to >> planes and that into deserts in the mountains. > > Land clearing and temperature rise are the main problem. The only > sensible solution is a massive reduction in the human population. > >> So Chinese deserts like Gobi or Lop Nor were formerly lakes or internal >> seas, but are now deserts in mountain ranges. This is - unfortunately - >> a consequence of 'Growing Earth'. >> >> Central Europe will also be a desert one day, but fortunately this will >> take a few million years. > > It is more likely to experience another ice age before then. > >> There's not much hope in such a situation, since humans have no >> influence upon Earth' interior, hence cannot stop the process itself. > > The Earth's interior is not to blame. The problems are mainly due to > human activity. Sure, human activities is causing trouble on planet Earth. But the effect you describe, which causes desertification, is not caused by humans, but by Earth itself. It is completely pointless to try to find remedies, if you do not understand the problem itself. Here we have the overall development of the planet, upon which we live. You assume, this planet is simply a ball, floating through space and that's it. So you assume (falsely), that the planet was once created as it is now and therefore stays in that state forever. This 'steady state assumption' is wrong and celestial bodies have kind of lifespan, over which they change their appearance. So planets grow and in further development eventually 'die'. And we find deceased planets as splinter parts in the asteroid belt or Orth's cloud. Human being live on planet Earth, but have no influence on the planets celestial development. People can, nevertheless, make the planet less habitable, what they actually do. But the creation of deserts is not among the human deeds, but caused by the development of the planet itself. Since the idea of 'Growing Earth' is rejected, even thou it's long known and actually older than plate tectonics, the remedies do not help, since they do not influence the relevant mechanism. So, before considering human suicide, you should try to think about this idea and whether or not planets grow and how this would cause the creation of deserts. I am actually kind of 'expert' in this field and have done some sort of 'research' for several years. Mainly I have looked at certain formations in Peru and Chile (on Google.Earth) and tried to figure out, how these landscape have formed over millions of years. My favourite example is the Atacama desert in Chile, which is the driest place on Earth. This was formerly an internal sea, which dried out 15 million years ago. This is known very precisely, since the vanishing water left gipsum crystals, which are still there. It is possible to calculate the age of these crystals. So we know, the Atacama desert was a large lake or sea, 15 million years ago. Since the desert is high in the mountains, the question occurs, how the water got there. Answer: the Earth was once smaller and current surface was once sea-floor. Former island are now mountains. And with growth of the planets the sea-floor went higher in respect to the mean sea-level, since the water flows into deeper locations, leaving former sea-floor behind. Possibility (for humans) to stop or change this effect: zero. We could actually plant forests and maintain forests, that are already there. This would help a bit, since forests evaporated water, which causes clouds to build and rain down over that area. But we cannot stop planetary growth. >> But since Growth means also new land, there is kind of compensation for >> land lost to the deserts. > > There is no more land available and much of its production is dependent > on dwindling water and phosphate reserves. Whilst there is a surplus of > food rigth now, it is only a matter of time before a droung or flood > You assume this, because you assume the 'steady state' of planet Earth. Only this assumption is wrong, since we can actually sea creation of new land everywhere. E.g. Atolls have been formerly reefs and those were built by corals, which live in oceans. Dropping sea-levels turn reefs into island, which is actually new land. But also sea-floor falls eventually dry. E.g. Australian outback looks reddish, because there is lots of iron oxide upon the surface. This was distributed there at a time, when current land was covered with water. Or England and the cliffs of Dover. These cliffs are chalk and that stems from remains of tiny animals, which live in sea-water. So the British isles have once been sea-floor (millions of years ago). Same with Germany, (where I live). Brandenburg is an area, which is full of sand in the ground. And sand requires water to be created. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 04:23 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npkon1$g7n$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390715 |
On 24/08/16 15:37, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 24.08.2016 03:19, schrieb HGWilson, DSc.: > >>>>> Question is, how to get the salt out. >>>> >>>> That takes ENERGY...lot of it! >> >>> Well, yes. But energy isn't a big problem neither. It is a problem, but >>> not of the kind, which could not be solved. >>> >>> So, now (cheap!) energy sources are required, which enable to de-salt >>> huge amounts of sea-water. >>> >>> Should be possible, but I actually do not to speculate about the >>> details. >> >> Have you heard of Dubai? It has been using oil for desalination but its >> reserves are now running out. Right now, 3,000,000 people live in >> inhospitable desert. What do you think will happen to them without >> energy? Incidentally, Dubai has no sewerage system an has to cart all >> waste into a remote spot in the desert where it is dumped. > > > I have heard about a process called 'reverted osmosis', which allows to > desalt water. > > Possibly the Dubains could buy a few of these machines and create > desalted water. I think they do that already...but it is still uses a lot of energy....pushing water through membranes at 400 psi.... > As possible energy source they have actually the sun, which shines a lot > in Dubai. The word will need lots more solar panels in future....but their energy payback time is still quite long. >> >>> There's not much hope in such a situation, since humans have no >>> influence upon Earth' interior, hence cannot stop the process itself. >> >> The Earth's interior is not to blame. The problems are mainly due to >> human activity. > > Sure, human activities is causing trouble on planet Earth. > > But the effect you describe, which causes desertification, is not caused > by humans, but by Earth itself. Sure, there are regions that get little rainfall...and they have been deserts for many thousands of years. The changes of today have occurred mainly in the last hundred years and are rapidly increasing in rate. > It is completely pointless to try to find remedies, if you do not > understand the problem itself. There is a very simple solution. Cheap RU486 pills. > Here we have the overall development of the planet, upon which we live. The 'development' has turned into wasteful exploitation and ultimate destruction. > You assume, this planet is simply a ball, floating through space and > that's it. So you assume (falsely), that the planet was once created as > it is now and therefore stays in that state forever. > > I am actually kind of 'expert' in this field and have done some sort of > 'research' for several years. Mainly I have looked at certain formations > in Peru and Chile (on Google.Earth) and tried to figure out, how these > landscape have formed over millions of years. You don't seem to know much about the Earth at all. Do you know what sedimentary rock is? Have you heard of sub-oceanic plate movement? The desert in Chile has been caused by the uplifting of land as the eastern pacific plate moves underneath the W coast of S America. A combination of cold water currents, dry trade winds and the 'rain shadow' effect has resulted in almost zero rainfall in that whole area. > Answer: the Earth was once smaller and current surface was once > sea-floor. Former island are now mountains. And with growth of the > planets the sea-floor went higher in respect to the mean sea-level, > since the water flows into deeper locations, leaving former sea-floor > behind. This is nonsense. Why don't you read a decent book about the geological history of the Earth. The earth's axis regularly changes its tilt. Its magnetic field moves around. The continents were once all connected and are more or less 'floating' on magma. Most large mountain ranges such as the Himalayas and Swiss alps have been formed by one land mass colliding with another. Ice ages come and go regularly...of course there is constant change... but the changes caused by human activity hav > Possibility (for humans) to stop or change this effect: zero. > > We could actually plant forests and maintain forests, that are already > there. This would help a bit, since forests evaporated water, which > causes clouds to build and rain down over that area. > > But we cannot stop planetary growth. > > > >>> But since Growth means also new land, there is kind of compensation for >>> land lost to the deserts. >> >> There is no more land available and much of its production is dependent >> on dwindling water and phosphate reserves. Whilst there is a surplus of >> food rigth now, it is only a matter of time before a droung or flood >> > > You assume this, because you assume the 'steady state' of planet Earth. > Only this assumption is wrong, since we can actually sea creation of new > land everywhere. > > E.g. Atolls have been formerly reefs and those were built by corals, > which live in oceans. > > Dropping sea-levels turn reefs into island, which is actually new land. > > But also sea-floor falls eventually dry. E.g. Australian outback looks > reddish, because there is lots of iron oxide upon the surface. This was > distributed there at a time, when current land was covered with water. > > Or England and the cliffs of Dover. These cliffs are chalk and that > stems from remains of tiny animals, which live in sea-water. > > So the British isles have once been sea-floor (millions of years ago). > > Same with Germany, (where I live). > > Brandenburg is an area, which is full of sand in the ground. And sand > requires water to be created. > > TH >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 04:26 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <npkot1$g7n$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #390779 |
On 25/08/16 04:23, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > On 24/08/16 15:37, Thomas Heger wrote: > > This is nonsense. Why don't you read a decent book about the > geological history of the Earth. The earth's axis regularly changes > its tilt. Its magnetic field moves around. The continents were once > all connected and are more or less 'floating' on magma. Most large > mountain ranges such as the Himalayas and Swiss alps have been formed > by one land mass colliding with another. Ice ages come and go > regularly...of course there is constant change... but the changes > caused by human activity have occurred orders of magnitude more > quickly than the natural processes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web