"I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson

Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:

https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/

On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 05:08:28 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote in
<315a54af-e8a8-469e-b4cb-953593eeccc2n@googlegroups.com>:

>"I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasin=
>gly I feel duped"
>
>https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson

>
>Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground=
> transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>
>https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/

I was hoping for a little quadcopter or autogiro....
On nuclear fusion power of course :-)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autogyro
so you can start from your garden....

On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 5:08:33 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>
> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>
> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/

"Sadly, keeping your old petrol car may be better than buying an EV. There are sound environmental reasons not to jump just yet"
No, keeping your old electric car may be better.

"As you may know, the government has proposed a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030"
Fat chance, Ain't gonna happen.

"Currently, on average we keep our new cars for only three years before selling them on, driven mainly by the ubiquitous three-year leasing model. This seems an outrageously profligate use of the world’s natural resources when you consider what great condition a three-year-old car is in. "
EV credits should spread over 10 years, and only when they own and drive the cars.

"Rowan Atkinson is an actor, COMEDIAN and writer"
Yes, sure.

On 6/6/2023 8:08 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson

"Electric motoring is, in theory, a subject about which I should know
something. My first university degree was in electrical and electronic
engineering, with a subsequent master’s in control systems."

But he became a full-time actor not much more than a year later, not
exactly a recent/relevant reference. Doesn't seem like he was exactly
passionate for the field.

> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>
> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/

Yes he's going on about synthetic fuels and the "hydrogen economy" for
passenger cars, he's a know-nothing.

I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a low-income family to break
the budget for an EV when corporate polluters (and the largest
institutional CO2 emitter in the world, the US military) pollute so
much, but he uses too many words to say it and not nearly stridently
enough, going 2 get fired by corporate sponsors if he does that.

On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>
> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>
> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/

I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly all electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".

Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?

Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.

When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong thing.

This is sad.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 13:19:35 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>On 6/6/2023 8:08 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>
>"Electric motoring is, in theory, a subject about which I should know
>something. My first university degree was in electrical and electronic
>engineering, with a subsequent master’s in control systems."
>
>But he became a full-time actor not much more than a year later, not
>exactly a recent/relevant reference. Doesn't seem like he was exactly
>passionate for the field.
>
>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>>
>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>
>Yes he's going on about synthetic fuels and the "hydrogen economy" for
>passenger cars, he's a know-nothing.
>
>I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a low-income family to break
>the budget for an EV when corporate polluters (and the largest
>institutional CO2 emitter in the world, the US military) pollute so
>much, but he uses too many words to say it and not nearly stridently
>enough, going 2 get fired by corporate sponsors if he does that.

CO2 isn't pollution, it's plant food. If you want to reduce your CO2
production, stop breathing.

On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>
>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>>
>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>
> I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly all electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".
>
> Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?
>
> Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.
>
> When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong thing.
>
> This is sad.
>

The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people
with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually.

But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred
list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson
promote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and
fusion nuclear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other
pointless crap.

Anything to maintain the status quo and keep the gravy train rolling
while deflecting attention away from the primary villain, which is
global neoliberal capitalism.

On 6/6/2023 2:49 PM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 13:19:35 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
>
>> On 6/6/2023 8:08 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>
>> "Electric motoring is, in theory, a subject about which I should know
>> something. My first university degree was in electrical and electronic
>> engineering, with a subsequent master’s in control systems."
>>
>> But he became a full-time actor not much more than a year later, not
>> exactly a recent/relevant reference. Doesn't seem like he was exactly
>> passionate for the field.
>>
>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>>>
>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>>
>> Yes he's going on about synthetic fuels and the "hydrogen economy" for
>> passenger cars, he's a know-nothing.
>>
>> I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a low-income family to break
>> the budget for an EV when corporate polluters (and the largest
>> institutional CO2 emitter in the world, the US military) pollute so
>> much, but he uses too many words to say it and not nearly stridently
>> enough, going 2 get fired by corporate sponsors if he does that.
>
> CO2 isn't pollution, it's plant food. If you want to reduce your CO2
> production, stop breathing.
>

Now that's not very nice. I don't want you to "stop breathing"! I want
you to be alive and well when the fully automated luxury gay space
communist revolution hoists the red banner over Sacramento.

On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:29:29 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>On 6/6/2023 2:49 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 13:19:35 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/6/2023 8:08 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>>
>>> "Electric motoring is, in theory, a subject about which I should know
>>> something. My first university degree was in electrical and electronic
>>> engineering, with a subsequent master’s in control systems."
>>>
>>> But he became a full-time actor not much more than a year later, not
>>> exactly a recent/relevant reference. Doesn't seem like he was exactly
>>> passionate for the field.
>>>
>>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
>>>>
>>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>>>
>>> Yes he's going on about synthetic fuels and the "hydrogen economy" for
>>> passenger cars, he's a know-nothing.
>>>
>>> I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a low-income family to break
>>> the budget for an EV when corporate polluters (and the largest
>>> institutional CO2 emitter in the world, the US military) pollute so
>>> much, but he uses too many words to say it and not nearly stridently
>>> enough, going 2 get fired by corporate sponsors if he does that.
>>
>> CO2 isn't pollution, it's plant food. If you want to reduce your CO2
>> production, stop breathing.
>>
>
>Now that's not very nice. I don't want you to "stop breathing"! I want
>you to be alive and well when the fully automated luxury gay space
>communist revolution hoists the red banner over Sacramento.

We drive past Sacramento but we've never been there. Is it any fun?

The real luxury-communist (!) gay space is Castro Street, where we
were half an hour ago.

The banner isn't red, it's the rainbow flag, aka fagrag.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.citybirds.com%2FDigitalPhotos26%2FTheCastro03.jpg&tbnid=B0wBaWBUUzg0SM&vet=12ahUKEwi-_u2WtK__AhWXjo4IHaIECMkQxiAoA3oECAAQFA..i&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.citybirds.com%2FDigitalPhotos26%2FTheCastro03.html&docid=2U-xSzKJO_hgdM&w=800&h=600&itg=1&q=castro%20pride%20flag&ved=2ahUKEwi-_u2WtK__AhWXjo4IHaIECMkQxiAoA3oECAAQFA

On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 2:50:16 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 13:19:35 -0400, bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
>
> >On 6/6/2023 8:08 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> >> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
> >>
> >> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
> >
> >"Electric motoring is, in theory, a subject about which I should know
> >something. My first university degree was in electrical and electronic
> >engineering, with a subsequent master’s in control systems."
> >
> >But he became a full-time actor not much more than a year later, not
> >exactly a recent/relevant reference. Doesn't seem like he was exactly
> >passionate for the field.
> >
> >> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much volume:
> >>
> >> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
> >
> >Yes he's going on about synthetic fuels and the "hydrogen economy" for
> >passenger cars, he's a know-nothing.
> >
> >I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a low-income family to break
> >the budget for an EV when corporate polluters (and the largest
> >institutional CO2 emitter in the world, the US military) pollute so
> >much, but he uses too many words to say it and not nearly stridently
> >enough, going 2 get fired by corporate sponsors if he does that.
> CO2 isn't pollution, it's plant food. If you want to reduce your CO2
> production, stop breathing.

So how about we pump in 100% CO2 into your home, while you are sleeping? You wouldn't know what happened. You'd simply never wake up.

So is plant food good? Can we have too much of it?

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:19:04 -0400) it happened bitrex
<user@example.net> wrote in <JELfM.5$kHz5.3@fx15.iad>:

>On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>>
>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much
>>> volume:
>>>
>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>>
>> I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly all
>> electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".
>>
>> Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?
>>
>> Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.
>>
>> When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily
>> manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong thing.
>>
>> This is sad.
>>
>
>The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people
>with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually.
>
>But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred
>list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson
>promote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and
>fusion nuclear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other
>pointless crap.

I hope you are joking?
Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
And we will need all the nuclear power we can get to survive the next ice age,
And will need all other forms of power generation...
Not that I expect CERN / ITER to come up with even a break even fusion power plant.
Only fusion I know about that even kids have done is the Farnsworth fusor:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
I was thinking about using focussed beams... to improve efficiency...

>Anything to maintain the status quo and keep the gravy train rolling
>while deflecting attention away from the primary villain, which is
>global neoliberal capitalism.

Wars are the way the US Military Industrial Complex creates jobs
it then sucks funds from the US taxpayer and burns people as fuel.
The SeeEyeAAAh has as task to put petrol on each little spark or fire it can find in the world
to create those wars.

But ultimately it is one ant heap against the other... Capitalism, Communism, religious fanatics... you name it.
The best one will win, Darwin, evolution.
Better weapons or system will remain, or totally nothing if we manage to create the black hole bomb
and suck up our galaxy to perhaps create a new big bang or whatever you can imagine...
I fully expect glow-ball nuculear war in 2024
after that camping in the wild chasing rabbits burning wood for cooking...
Who knows.
Here is a whole discussion about doing away with cash all together in the EU, only digital money.
Now after the next high altitude nuke none of that will work.
I've been at the supermarket when their payment system did not work,. (cards no longer accepted)
and people had to go away to get cash from some machine, long lines waiting.
but now they have removed most of those machines too...
Digital money only, how stupid can you get.
Back to gold perhaps.

So and of course in the long run the humming species will not persist....

On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 23:03:32 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Anthony
William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
<980629d7-665f-446a-80cc-909fbd9b83e8n@googlegroups.com>:

>On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 3:02:00 PM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrot=
>e:
>> On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:19:04 -0400) it happened bitrex
>> <us...@example.net> wrote in <JELfM.5$kHz...@fx15.iad>:
>> >On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
>> >> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrot=
>e:
>
><snip>
>
>> >The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people=
> with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually=
>.
>> >
>> >But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred =
>list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson pr=
>omote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and fusion nuc=
>lear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other pointless crap.
>>
>> I hope you are joking?
>> Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other plane=
>ts, galaxies.
>
>Twaddle. All our ancestors have managed to survive so far without access to=
> other planets.

Notice he who is called panteltje wrote LONG run....

>Getting to other planets might give us more options, but we are adapted to =
>this one, which give it a head start.
>
>> And we will need all the nuclear power we can get to survive the next ice=
> age,
>
>We survived the last ice age without nuclear power.

Very few did.

>> And will need all other forms of power generation...
>
>We've got a few which we didn't have then.
>
>> Not that I expect CERN / ITER to come up with even a break even fusion po=
>wer plant.
>
>They will probably get there eventually.

Quoting he who's is called panteltje:
"If you cannot do it with those small particles on the desktop then you will not
be able to do it in a machine the size of the universe.
"

ITER is just a political job creation process.
good chance if it ever stars up it will show it will have to be 'just a little bit bigger' and
there go the taxes you payed into building yet an other one.

>> Only fusion I know about that even kids have done is the Farnsworth fusor=
>:
>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
>
>There is the giant fusion reactor hanging the sky which provides almost all=
> the power we use at moment. Nuclear power depends on past super-novas.
>
>> I was thinking about using focussed beams... to improve efficiency...
>
>https://hb11.energy/

Interesting, but too simple..

Note how may of these sort of adventured died:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell

><snip>
>
>> But ultimately it is one ant heap against the other... Capitalism, Commun=
>ism, religious fanatics... you name it.
>> The best one will win, Darwin, evolution.
>
>"Best" as defined by longest surviving?

Sure, adapting to the environment if you will :-)
If we mess up that environment with nuclear radiation from our wars ?
Darwin award!

><snip>
>
>> So and of course in the long run the human species will not persist....
>
>Of course it won't. Species typically last about 10 million years.
>
>Our situation is unusual - we are a social mammal and do large scale cooper=
>ation (like ants and bees) but haven't yet started specialising in particul=
>ar roles.

There is a lot of specialization in our species.
EU is now into importing workers from countries where the average education is very low.
To compensate for low birth rates.
So soon it will be back to life like it is in Africa now here.

Only workers, no scientists...
China is busy giving their population higher education, university level for everybody.

>Evolution is going to rework us so we can cooperate more effectively, and w=
>hat emerges from that process is going to be a more diverse species, with e=
>ven more differences between individuals than we see now. The lying twits w=
>ho make it difficult for us to collaborate will get edited out, probably be=
>cause nobody will mate with them or help raise their repulsive kids.

Well, I am sure that the US controlled media will use cloning or whatever it takes to keep going
Controlling the masses...
Already they do not know the difference between men and women, so and with AI doing the selections
where will it go?
hehe

On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 05:01:42 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:19:04 -0400) it happened bitrex
><user@example.net> wrote in <JELfM.5$kHz5.3@fx15.iad>:
>
>>On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>>>
>>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much
>>>> volume:
>>>>
>>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>>>
>>> I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly all
>>> electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".
>>>
>>> Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?
>>>
>>> Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.
>>>
>>> When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily
>>> manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong thing.
>>>
>>> This is sad.
>>>
>>
>>The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people
>>with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually.
>>
>>But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred
>>list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson
>>promote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and
>>fusion nuclear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other
>>pointless crap.
>
>I hope you are joking?
>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.

I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
another planet.

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:22:21 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 05:01:42 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:19:04 -0400) it happened bitrex
> ><us...@example.net> wrote in <JELfM.5$kHz...@fx15.iad>:
> >
> >>On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> >>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
> >>>>
> >>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much
> >>>> volume:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
> >>>
> >>> I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly all
> >>> electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".
> >>>
> >>> Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?
> >>>
> >>> Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.
> >>>
> >>> When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily
> >>> manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong thing.
> >>>
> >>> This is sad.
> >>>
> >>
> >>The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people
> >>with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually.
> >>
> >>But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred
> >>list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson
> >>promote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and
> >>fusion nuclear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other
> >>pointless crap.
> >
> >I hope you are joking?
> >Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
> I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
> another planet.

Yeah, they'll never fly, either.

Oh, wait, they have.

I think the idea of a colony ship is practical if built on a large enough scale. Probably the size of a moon, or even a planet. But it will be a long time before anyone decides it is needed. Long after we are all dead.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 2:50:16 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

> CO2 isn't pollution, it's plant food. If you want to reduce your CO2
> production, stop breathing.

In large quantities, ANYTHING is pollution. Oxygen, for example,
is toxic at one atmosphere, and a fire hazard below that.

Stopping breathing would prevent the toxic effect, but your
house will still burn down.

On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 07:22:00 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
<qe418i1ao9hga3gdbloipiat270bnufab8@4ax.com>:

>On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 05:01:42 GMT, Jan Panteltje
><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:19:04 -0400) it happened bitrex
>><user@example.net> wrote in <JELfM.5$kHz5.3@fx15.iad>:
>>
>>>On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>>>>
>>>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much
>>>>> volume:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>>>>
>>>> I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly
>>>> all
>>>> electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".
>>>>
>>>> Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.
>>>>
>>>> When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily
>>>> manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong
>>>> thing.
>>>>
>>>> This is sad.
>>>>
>>>
>>>The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people
>>>with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually.
>>>
>>>But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred
>>>list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson
>>>promote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and
>>>fusion nuclear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other
>>>pointless crap.
>>
>>I hope you are joking?
>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
>
>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
>another planet.

And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !

On a sunny day (Wed, 7 Jun 2023 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT)) it happened
bot Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
<a0ac15a8-d3ec-446a-9ccf-decd690abba4n@googlegroups.com>:

>You really are a gibbering idiot. Not perhaps as far gone as Flyguy, but getting there.

Must be your influence

Lemme experiment with bill sloman in the filters
to protect myself!

I will never see your posting nor anyone replying to it
Zero electronics content anyways.

On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 07:22:00 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
><qe418i1ao9hga3gdbloipiat270bnufab8@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 05:01:42 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On a sunny day (Tue, 6 Jun 2023 15:19:04 -0400) it happened bitrex
>>><user@example.net> wrote in <JELfM.5$kHz5.3@fx15.iad>:
>>>
>>>>On 6/6/2023 1:33 PM, Ricky wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 8:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>>>> "I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Synthetic fuels will work for aviation, and even ocean shipping, but ground transport seems to be a reach- just too much
>>>>>> volume:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://earth.org/sustainable-aviation-fuel-companies/
>>>>>
>>>>> I was reading the article until I read this, "The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly
>>>>> all
>>>>> electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, many rare earth metals and huge amounts of energy are required to make them".
>>>>>
>>>>> Lithium ion batteries do not contain rare earth metals. How do people keep getting this wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if lithium ion batteries did contain rare earth metals, why is that a problem? Rare earth metals are not rare.
>>>>>
>>>>> When prominent people like Rowan Atkinson make erroneous statements, they influence perversely, a large number of easily
>>>>> manipulated people. People who have a hard time learning, and a much harder time unlearning when they've learned the wrong
>>>>> thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is sad.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex knows that most people
>>>>with brains will be able to grasp the concept of global warming eventually.
>>>>
>>>>But the military-industrial pseudo-scientific complex has its preferred
>>>>list of money-wasting non-solutions it would prefer people like Atkinson
>>>>promote like the "hydrogen economy", ethanol biofuels, fission and
>>>>fusion nuclear, geo-engineering, space colonization/SpaceX, and other
>>>>pointless crap.
>>>
>>>I hope you are joking?
>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
>>
>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
>>another planet.
>
>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.

It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.

>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
>
>

No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA
wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.

Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
Earth does.

There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.

On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 23:56:17 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
<27u28ih9fj70crhbcoartdgbtiflki81hq@4ax.com>:

>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
>>>
>>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
>>>another planet.
>>
>>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
>
>It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.
>
>>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
>>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
>>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
>>
>>
>
>No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA

There are several moons orbiting our planets that may well have
water and reasonable temperatures.

>wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
>humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.

Of course to reduce radiation exposure we must use nuclear propulsion for far away trips.
There are more methods to reduce exposure to high energy charged particles,
both by creating a magnetic field and by using stuff found on the new locations
to build shelters.
Going underground has been suggested as a good way.

As to DNA not surviving in space, experiments have been done with life forms on the outside of the ISS
and those were still alive after many weeks ..

Life is just a self assembling process, like electrons protons and neutrons forming our elements,
those then forming more complex things, finally (likely more an in-between step) us,
and now us assembling cell-phones and the like, and maybe AI doing something
we have not even been able to imagine...
Ever more complex and fantastic.

>Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
>Earth does.

See what I wrote
May I suggest you read up on published work, not just your usual books.
As to life on Mars, the late Dr Levin's experiment on the Vikinger lander was positive for life:
http://www.gillevin.com/

But NASA, partly funded by Republicans that believe earth was created 4000 years ago and believe in Adam and Eve
and STILL today teach that to their kids will NEVER admit to a positive for life test
and deliberately land rovers on places where there is the least possibility to find any.
This is the religious denial.
NASA just a job creation program: some guys doing acrobatics while driving around the block.
Job creation taxes burning useless crap, like that Boeing space thing that still needs to fly people to that same ISS
READ what's going on.
In the sixties we could fly to the moon and back...
Decline! Technological decline!
The only hope is on China these days, they have a Mars lender too and are not hampered AFAIK by religious dogma.
May I suggest (but I know you are very busy switching resistors?) you read
https://www.sciencedaily.com/
https://www.space.com/
https://arstechnica.com/
on a maybe daily basis

I watch NASA TV every now and then on Hotbird 13 East satellite, I am sure 'merricans can get it too somehow, maybe via internet.
There are very good free to air science programs here on some German TV channels.
Recently I did see the best one about nuclear power I've seen since my school days.
all the ways from Uraninite, also known as pitchblende, to the bombs on Japan.
One can wonder if not the next logical step for Russia is to nuke Kiev..
US will declare it a war crime, but then who dared object to US nuking Japan in WW2?
War crimes all over, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, now burning Ukrainians,
just to get some more buyers? No people, no money, no buyers, no usable land.
US Mafia

>There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.

Growing plants in a water culture is no problem, has been done, also on the ISS.
Plenty vegetarians on earth.

Most if not all technological hurdles to live on other worlds have been solved for long ago.

On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 09:12:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:

>On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 23:56:17 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
><27u28ih9fj70crhbcoartdgbtiflki81hq@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
>>>>
>>>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
>>>>another planet.
>>>
>>>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
>>
>>It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.
>>
>>>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
>>>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
>>>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
>>>
>>>
>>
>>No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA
>
>There are several moons orbiting our planets that may well have
>water and reasonable temperatures.
>
>
>>wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
>>humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.
>
>Of course to reduce radiation exposure we must use nuclear propulsion for far away trips.
>There are more methods to reduce exposure to high energy charged particles,
>both by creating a magnetic field and by using stuff found on the new locations
>to build shelters.
>Going underground has been suggested as a good way.
>
>As to DNA not surviving in space, experiments have been done with life forms on the outside of the ISS
>and those were still alive after many weeks ..
>
>Life is just a self assembling process, like electrons protons and neutrons forming our elements,
>those then forming more complex things, finally (likely more an in-between step) us,
>and now us assembling cell-phones and the like, and maybe AI doing something
>we have not even been able to imagine...
>Ever more complex and fantastic.
>
>
>>Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
>>Earth does.
>
>See what I wrote
>May I suggest you read up on published work, not just your usual books.
>As to life on Mars, the late Dr Levin's experiment on the Vikinger lander was positive for life:
> http://www.gillevin.com/
>
>But NASA, partly funded by Republicans that believe earth was created 4000 years ago and believe in Adam and Eve
>and STILL today teach that to their kids will NEVER admit to a positive for life test
>and deliberately land rovers on places where there is the least possibility to find any.
>This is the religious denial.
>NASA just a job creation program: some guys doing acrobatics while driving around the block.
>Job creation taxes burning useless crap, like that Boeing space thing that still needs to fly people to that same ISS
>READ what's going on.

I agree that NASA is mostly a money burning PR enterprise, and the
Boeing SLA is absurd. Wiki says

Cost per launch: Over US$2 billion excluding development (estimate)

to ship spam-in-a-can into vacuum. They'll probably kill more
astronauts.

>In the sixties we could fly to the moon and back...

Which accomplished nothing.

>Decline! Technological decline!
>The only hope is on China these days, they have a Mars lender too and are not hampered AFAIK by religious dogma.

China should feed its kids first.

>May I suggest (but I know you are very busy switching resistors?) you read
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/
> https://www.space.com/
> https://arstechnica.com/
>on a maybe daily basis

I do see the science news, which is 98% nonsense. I check the tech
news more, keeping up with technology, markets, and components. That's
a lot of work.

>
>I watch NASA TV every now and then on Hotbird 13 East satellite, I am sure 'merricans can get it too somehow, maybe via internet.
>There are very good free to air science programs here on some German TV channels.
>Recently I did see the best one about nuclear power I've seen since my school days.
>all the ways from Uraninite, also known as pitchblende, to the bombs on Japan.
>One can wonder if not the next logical step for Russia is to nuke Kiev..
>US will declare it a war crime, but then who dared object to US nuking Japan in WW2?
>War crimes all over, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, now burning Ukrainians,
>just to get some more buyers? No people, no money, no buyers, no usable land.
>US Mafia
>
>
>
>
>>There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.
>
>Growing plants in a water culture is no problem, has been done, also on the ISS.
>Plenty vegetarians on earth.
>
>Most if not all technological hurdles to live on other worlds have been solved for long ago.

A colony on the moon or Mars would die out without constant deliveries
from earth. The ISS can't grow enough food to feed even one crew
member.

On a sunny day (Thu, 08 Jun 2023 06:54:04 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
<amm38itcjof2keviavo924qe9bdncsdpur@4ax.com>:

>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 09:12:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 23:56:17 -0700) it happened John Larkin
>><jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
>><27u28ih9fj70crhbcoartdgbtiflki81hq@4ax.com>:
>>
>>>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
>>>>>another planet.
>>>>
>>>>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
>>>
>>>It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.
>>>
>>>>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
>>>>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
>>>>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA
>>
>>There are several moons orbiting our planets that may well have
>>water and reasonable temperatures.
>>
>>
>>>wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
>>>humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.
>>
>>Of course to reduce radiation exposure we must use nuclear propulsion for far away trips.
>>There are more methods to reduce exposure to high energy charged particles,
>>both by creating a magnetic field and by using stuff found on the new locations
>>to build shelters.
>>Going underground has been suggested as a good way.
>>
>>As to DNA not surviving in space, experiments have been done with life forms on the outside of the ISS
>>and those were still alive after many weeks ..
>>
>>Life is just a self assembling process, like electrons protons and neutrons forming our elements,
>>those then forming more complex things, finally (likely more an in-between step) us,
>>and now us assembling cell-phones and the like, and maybe AI doing something
>>we have not even been able to imagine...
>>Ever more complex and fantastic.
>>
>>
>>>Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
>>>Earth does.
>>
>>See what I wrote
>>May I suggest you read up on published work, not just your usual books.
>>As to life on Mars, the late Dr Levin's experiment on the Vikinger lander was positive for life:
>> http://www.gillevin.com/
>>
>>But NASA, partly funded by Republicans that believe earth was created 4000 years ago and believe in Adam and Eve
>>and STILL today teach that to their kids will NEVER admit to a positive for life test
>>and deliberately land rovers on places where there is the least possibility to find any.
>>This is the religious denial.
>>NASA just a job creation program: some guys doing acrobatics while driving around the block.
>>Job creation taxes burning useless crap, like that Boeing space thing that still needs to fly people to that same ISS
>>READ what's going on.
>
>I agree that NASA is mostly a money burning PR enterprise, and the
>Boeing SLA is absurd. Wiki says
>
>Cost per launch: Over US$2 billion excluding development (estimate)
>
>to ship spam-in-a-can into vacuum. They'll probably kill more
>astronauts.
>
>
>>In the sixties we could fly to the moon and back...
>
>Which accomplished nothing.

Well, it proved we could leave the planet and come back alive.
It also united us earthlings in big way.

>>Decline! Technological decline!
>>The only hope is on China these days, they have a Mars lender too and are not hampered AFAIK by religious dogma.
>
>China should feed its kids first.

I dunno, I see google shows something different:
https://china.usc.edu/china-us-and-hungry-world

And housing is better in China, not many homeless:
https://www.quora.com/Does-China-or-the-USA-have-a-higher-rate-of-homelessness
I have read in LA they are camping on the beach?

>>May I suggest (but I know you are very busy switching resistors?) you read
>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/
>> https://www.space.com/
>> https://arstechnica.com/
>>on a maybe daily basis
>
>I do see the science news, which is 98% nonsense. I check the tech
>news more, keeping up with technology, markets, and components. That's
>a lot of work.
>
>
>>
>>I watch NASA TV every now and then on Hotbird 13 East satellite, I am sure 'merricans can get it too somehow, maybe via
>>internet.
>>There are very good free to air science programs here on some German TV channels.
>>Recently I did see the best one about nuclear power I've seen since my school days.
>>all the ways from Uraninite, also known as pitchblende, to the bombs on Japan.
>>One can wonder if not the next logical step for Russia is to nuke Kiev..
>>US will declare it a war crime, but then who dared object to US nuking Japan in WW2?
>>War crimes all over, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, now burning Ukrainians,
>>just to get some more buyers? No people, no money, no buyers, no usable land.
>>US Mafia
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.
>>
>>Growing plants in a water culture is no problem, has been done, also on the ISS.
>>Plenty vegetarians on earth.
>>
>>Most if not all technological hurdles to live on other worlds have been solved for long ago.
>
>A colony on the moon or Mars would die out without constant deliveries
>from earth. The ISS can't grow enough food to feed even one crew
>member.

ISS was never designed to be self-sustainable.

NASA is working on that:
What would it take to build a self-sustaining colony on Mars?
https://blog.richardvanhooijdonk.com/en/what-would-it-take-to-build-a-self-sustaining-colony-on-mars/

Its all simple technology, nothing mystical.
Where there is a will there is a way my father used to say.

To go to the moon - the [political] will was there to beat the Russians after Sputnik showed them reaching orbit -
Now its all about job creation...

On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 5:12:54 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 23:56:17 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> <27u28ih9fj70crhbc...@4ax.com>:
> >On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> ><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
> >>>
> >>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
> >>>another planet.
> >>
> >>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
> >
> >It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.
> >
> >>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
> >>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
> >>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
> >>
> >>
> >
> >No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA
> There are several moons orbiting our planets that may well have
> water and reasonable temperatures.

Necessary, but not sufficient conditions for life.

> >wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
> >humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.
> Of course to reduce radiation exposure we must use nuclear propulsion for far away trips.
> There are more methods to reduce exposure to high energy charged particles,
> both by creating a magnetic field and by using stuff found on the new locations
> to build shelters.

Which is very difficult to do while in space. Transporting mass is very expensive and creating large magnetic fields takes a lot of mass. That's why we tend to not use nuclear materials for manned missions, the shielding is far too massive.

> Going underground has been suggested as a good way.
>
> As to DNA not surviving in space, experiments have been done with life forms on the outside of the ISS
> and those were still alive after many weeks ..
>
> Life is just a self assembling process, like electrons protons and neutrons forming our elements,
> those then forming more complex things, finally (likely more an in-between step) us,
> and now us assembling cell-phones and the like, and maybe AI doing something
> we have not even been able to imagine...
> Ever more complex and fantastic.
> >Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
> >Earth does.
> See what I wrote
> May I suggest you read up on published work, not just your usual books.
> As to life on Mars, the late Dr Levin's experiment on the Vikinger lander was positive for life:
> http://www.gillevin.com/

What about the scientist who thought a meteorite carried fossilized life from Mars?

> But NASA, partly funded by Republicans that believe earth was created 4000 years ago and believe in Adam and Eve
> and STILL today teach that to their kids will NEVER admit to a positive for life test
> and deliberately land rovers on places where there is the least possibility to find any.

Which you know the reason for. No one who actually believes the Bible, believes we landed on the moon. That would be in direct opposition.

> This is the religious denial.
> NASA just a job creation program: some guys doing acrobatics while driving around the block.
> Job creation taxes burning useless crap, like that Boeing space thing that still needs to fly people to that same ISS
> READ what's going on.
> In the sixties we could fly to the moon and back...

The fact that we don't continue to do something, doesn't mean we can't. Sending people to the moon was very, very expensive and gave us relatively little in comparison. Going to Mars is the same, only much more so.

> Decline! Technological decline!
> The only hope is on China these days, they have a Mars lender too and are not hampered AFAIK by religious dogma.
> May I suggest (but I know you are very busy switching resistors?) you read
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/
> https://www.space.com/
> https://arstechnica.com/
> on a maybe daily basis
>
> I watch NASA TV every now and then on Hotbird 13 East satellite, I am sure 'merricans can get it too somehow, maybe via internet.
> There are very good free to air science programs here on some German TV channels.
> Recently I did see the best one about nuclear power I've seen since my school days.
> all the ways from Uraninite, also known as pitchblende, to the bombs on Japan.
> One can wonder if not the next logical step for Russia is to nuke Kiev..
> US will declare it a war crime, but then who dared object to US nuking Japan in WW2?
> War crimes all over, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, now burning Ukrainians,
> just to get some more buyers? No people, no money, no buyers, no usable land.
> US Mafia
> >There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.
> Growing plants in a water culture is no problem, has been done, also on the ISS.

Grown in water supplimented with various nutrients. When the nutrients are exhausted, the plants stop growing.

> Plenty vegetarians on earth.
>
> Most if not all technological hurdles to live on other worlds have been solved for long ago.

For someone who appears to be fairly intelligent, you say so many things that are wrong. Or, more accurately, you say a lot of things that sound good, but are actually very wrong, mostly because they are not complete.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 16:07:10 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:

>On a sunny day (Thu, 08 Jun 2023 06:54:04 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
><amm38itcjof2keviavo924qe9bdncsdpur@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 09:12:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 23:56:17 -0700) it happened John Larkin
>>><jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
>>><27u28ih9fj70crhbcoartdgbtiflki81hq@4ax.com>:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>>><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other planets, galaxies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on
>>>>>>another planet.
>>>>>
>>>>>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
>>>>
>>>>It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.
>>>>
>>>>>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the stars
>>>>>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
>>>>>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA
>>>
>>>There are several moons orbiting our planets that may well have
>>>water and reasonable temperatures.
>>>
>>>
>>>>wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
>>>>humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.
>>>
>>>Of course to reduce radiation exposure we must use nuclear propulsion for far away trips.
>>>There are more methods to reduce exposure to high energy charged particles,
>>>both by creating a magnetic field and by using stuff found on the new locations
>>>to build shelters.
>>>Going underground has been suggested as a good way.
>>>
>>>As to DNA not surviving in space, experiments have been done with life forms on the outside of the ISS
>>>and those were still alive after many weeks ..
>>>
>>>Life is just a self assembling process, like electrons protons and neutrons forming our elements,
>>>those then forming more complex things, finally (likely more an in-between step) us,
>>>and now us assembling cell-phones and the like, and maybe AI doing something
>>>we have not even been able to imagine...
>>>Ever more complex and fantastic.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
>>>>Earth does.
>>>
>>>See what I wrote
>>>May I suggest you read up on published work, not just your usual books.
>>>As to life on Mars, the late Dr Levin's experiment on the Vikinger lander was positive for life:
>>> http://www.gillevin.com/
>>>
>>>But NASA, partly funded by Republicans that believe earth was created 4000 years ago and believe in Adam and Eve
>>>and STILL today teach that to their kids will NEVER admit to a positive for life test
>>>and deliberately land rovers on places where there is the least possibility to find any.
>>>This is the religious denial.
>>>NASA just a job creation program: some guys doing acrobatics while driving around the block.
>>>Job creation taxes burning useless crap, like that Boeing space thing that still needs to fly people to that same ISS
>>>READ what's going on.
>>
>>I agree that NASA is mostly a money burning PR enterprise, and the
>>Boeing SLA is absurd. Wiki says
>>
>>Cost per launch: Over US$2 billion excluding development (estimate)
>>
>>to ship spam-in-a-can into vacuum. They'll probably kill more
>>astronauts.
>>
>>
>>>In the sixties we could fly to the moon and back...
>>
>>Which accomplished nothing.
>
>Well, it proved we could leave the planet and come back alive.
>It also united us earthlings in big way.
>
>
>
>>>Decline! Technological decline!
>>>The only hope is on China these days, they have a Mars lender too and are not hampered AFAIK by religious dogma.
>>
>>China should feed its kids first.
>
>I dunno, I see google shows something different:
> https://china.usc.edu/china-us-and-hungry-world
>
>And housing is better in China, not many homeless:
> https://www.quora.com/Does-China-or-the-USA-have-a-higher-rate-of-homelessness
>I have read in LA they are camping on the beach?
>
>
>>>May I suggest (but I know you are very busy switching resistors?) you read
>>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/
>>> https://www.space.com/
>>> https://arstechnica.com/
>>>on a maybe daily basis
>>
>>I do see the science news, which is 98% nonsense. I check the tech
>>news more, keeping up with technology, markets, and components. That's
>>a lot of work.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I watch NASA TV every now and then on Hotbird 13 East satellite, I am sure 'merricans can get it too somehow, maybe via
>>>internet.
>>>There are very good free to air science programs here on some German TV channels.
>>>Recently I did see the best one about nuclear power I've seen since my school days.
>>>all the ways from Uraninite, also known as pitchblende, to the bombs on Japan.
>>>One can wonder if not the next logical step for Russia is to nuke Kiev..
>>>US will declare it a war crime, but then who dared object to US nuking Japan in WW2?
>>>War crimes all over, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, now burning Ukrainians,
>>>just to get some more buyers? No people, no money, no buyers, no usable land.
>>>US Mafia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.
>>>
>>>Growing plants in a water culture is no problem, has been done, also on the ISS.
>>>Plenty vegetarians on earth.
>>>
>>>Most if not all technological hurdles to live on other worlds have been solved for long ago.
>>
>>A colony on the moon or Mars would die out without constant deliveries
>>from earth. The ISS can't grow enough food to feed even one crew
>>member.
>
>ISS was never designed to be self-sustainable.
>
>NASA is working on that:
> What would it take to build a self-sustaining colony on Mars?
> https://blog.richardvanhooijdonk.com/en/what-would-it-take-to-build-a-self-sustaining-colony-on-mars/

Preposterous way to spend billions, or trillions.

>
>
>Its all simple technology, nothing mystical.
>Where there is a will there is a way my father used to say.
>
>To go to the moon - the [political] will was there to beat the Russians after Sputnik showed them reaching orbit -
>Now its all about job creation...

Boots on the moon was never about science. It was nationalistic
posturing. Robots could have brought back moon dirt, which turned out
to be not terribly interesting.

Employing scientific and engineering talent in useless make-work
projects is a double waste to any country, especially a poor one.
Maybe the North Koreans will start a moon landing project and starve
another million people.

I designed flight hardware for the S1B moon rocket booster stage. I
don't think that program really did much good. Actually, one box used
a time-stamp technology that I use in some of my products, but I would
have re-invented that anyhow.

On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:31:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 16:07:10 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >On a sunny day (Thu, 08 Jun 2023 06:54:04 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> ><jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> ><amm38itcjof2kevia...@4ax.com>:
> >
> >>On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 09:12:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> >>wrote:

> Boots on the moon was never about science. It was nationalistic
> posturing. Robots could have brought back moon dirt, which turned out
> to be not terribly interesting.
>
> Employing scientific and engineering talent in useless make-work
> projects is a double waste to any country, especially a poor one.

Hard to know what 'useless' means, though. Any good welder
does a lot of test coupons which are not, of themselves, useful;
that's a matter of maintaining professional standards.

All education looks useless, if you consider only the products
that aren't internal to the students' minds.

Even 'nationalistic posturing' has a use: it encourages pride in one's work..

On a sunny day (Thu, 8 Jun 2023 09:21:50 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricky
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
<26d881de-91b9-4712-9f08-265eed2b2a09n@googlegroups.com>:

>On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 5:12:54 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Wed, 07 Jun 2023 23:56:17 -0700) it happened John Larkin=
>
>> <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
>> <27u28ih9fj70crhbc...@4ax.com>:
>> >On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 05:22:35 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>> ><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>>>Humanity's only chance for survival in the long run is space, other p=
>lanets, galaxies.
>> >>>
>> >>>I don't think any humans will ever live self-sustaining in space or on=
>
>> >>>another planet.
>> >>
>> >>And humans could never fly, as they were heavier than air.
>> >
>> >It was obvious that birds and bees and paper airplanes fly.
>> >
>> >>It may take a while.. we could perhaps send our DNA or something to the=
> stars
>> >>and see what comes of it and then fight them in wars?
>> >>Now there IS an opportunity for the US Military Industrial Complex !
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >No nearby planet is habitable. No star is within reach. Our DNA
>> There are several moons orbiting our planets that may well have
>> water and reasonable temperatures.
>
>Necessary, but not sufficient conditions for life.
>
>
>> >wouldn't survive for long in space, what with cosmic ray damage. Even
>> >humans might not survive a one-way trip to Mars.
>> Of course to reduce radiation exposure we must use nuclear propulsion for=
> far away trips.
>> There are more methods to reduce exposure to high energy charged particle=
>s,
>> both by creating a magnetic field and by using stuff found on the new loc=
>ations
>> to build shelters.
>
>Which is very difficult to do while in space. Transporting mass is very ex=
>pensive and creating large magnetic fields takes a lot of mass. That's why =
>we tend to not use nuclear materials for manned missions, the shielding is =
>far too massive.
>
>
>> Going underground has been suggested as a good way.
>>
>> As to DNA not surviving in space, experiments have been done with life fo=
>rms on the outside of the ISS
>> and those were still alive after many weeks ..
>>
>> Life is just a self assembling process, like electrons protons and neutro=
>ns forming our elements,
>> those then forming more complex things, finally (likely more an in-betwee=
>n step) us,
>> and now us assembling cell-phones and the like, and maybe AI doing someth=
>ing
>> we have not even been able to imagine...
>> Ever more complex and fantastic.
>> >Mars has no mag field, so doesn't get the cosmic ray shielding that
>> >Earth does.
>> See what I wrote
>> May I suggest you read up on published work, not just your usual books.=
>
>> As to life on Mars, the late Dr Levin's experiment on the Vikinger lander=
> was positive for life:
>> http://www.gillevin.com/
>
>What about the scientist who thought a meteorite carried fossilized life fr=
>om Mars?
>
>
>> But NASA, partly funded by Republicans that believe earth was created 400=
>0 years ago and believe in Adam and Eve
>> and STILL today teach that to their kids will NEVER admit to a positive f=
>or life test
>> and deliberately land rovers on places where there is the least possibili=
>ty to find any.
>
>Which you know the reason for. No one who actually believes the Bible, bel=
>ieves we landed on the moon. That would be in direct opposition.
>
>
>> This is the religious denial.
>> NASA just a job creation program: some guys doing acrobatics while drivin=
>g around the block.
>> Job creation taxes burning useless crap, like that Boeing space thing tha=
>t still needs to fly people to that same ISS
>> READ what's going on.
>> In the sixties we could fly to the moon and back...
>
>The fact that we don't continue to do something, doesn't mean we can't. Se=
>nding people to the moon was very, very expensive and gave us relatively li=
>ttle in comparison. Going to Mars is the same, only much more so.
>
>
>> Decline! Technological decline!
>> The only hope is on China these days, they have a Mars lender too and are=
> not hampered AFAIK by religious dogma.
>> May I suggest (but I know you are very busy switching resistors?) you rea=
>d
>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/
>> https://www.space.com/
>> https://arstechnica.com/
>> on a maybe daily basis
>>
>> I watch NASA TV every now and then on Hotbird 13 East satellite, I am sur=
>e 'merricans can get it too somehow, maybe via internet.
>> There are very good free to air science programs here on some German TV c=
>hannels.
>> Recently I did see the best one about nuclear power I've seen since my sc=
>hool days.
>> all the ways from Uraninite, also known as pitchblende, to the bombs on J=
>apan.
>> One can wonder if not the next logical step for Russia is to nuke Kiev..=
>
>> US will declare it a war crime, but then who dared object to US nuking Ja=
>pan in WW2?
>> War crimes all over, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, now burning Ukrainians,=
>
>> just to get some more buyers? No people, no money, no buyers, no usable l=
>and.
>> US Mafia
>> >There's nothing to breathe or eat there either.
>> Growing plants in a water culture is no problem, has been done, also on t=
>he ISS.
>
>Grown in water supplimented with various nutrients. When the nutrients are=
> exhausted, the plants stop growing.
>
>
>> Plenty vegetarians on earth.
>>
>> Most if not all technological hurdles to live on other worlds have been s=
>olved for long ago.
>
>For someone who appears to be fairly intelligent, you say so many things th=
>at are wrong. Or, more accurately, you say a lot of things that sound good=
>, but are actually very wrong, mostly because they are not complete.

Get a nuclear power plant going
Light, heat, cooling, for many years, same for making a magnetic field
Bring some chicken and eggs along, grow some seeds to feed those..
Energy is all you need.
Weight is not important, bring it to space one by one, little by little.
It is the nuculear fear that has stopped NASA's nuclear propulsion projects.
I have a plant here that has been getting tap water only for >20 years...
There is plenty stuff in Martian soil, maybe you can even cook the lifeforms there!
Columbus... pioneering, somebody, likely China now, will do it.
The new world social system!!
And then poor US will have to fight it...
BTW I was reading Tesla Bioweapon filters are saving NewYorkers from air pollution these days...

The world is full of na sayers.
Don't lisen to them, finding solutions is more fun.