razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Name one reasonable energy patent that oil companies have purchased and surpressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Truthful Liar Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Hmm... I'm travelling between Israel and India around late Feb. *starts to worry* :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDove Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Meh, Bush needs to dangle with weapons to hide what a pathetic campaign he is running, etc. Nothing new really, it's been done for ages. Meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anakin_Solo Posted January 4, 2003 Author Share Posted January 4, 2003 Ab_legion i would seriously advise not to travel near Isreal around this time... IF it is for work duties speak to your Boss. Ask him/Her if they would really like to see employees being put in danger. I bought our local newspaper, up here in Scotland. just to let you know how serious a threat WAR really is now! Daily Express This basicaly tells us that the TA in the United Kingdom are not on a War footing. This gives our boys one month to be ready for action. As i used to be in the TA, im really gutted i didnt get called up. So again i urge u to talk to your Bosses.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHobGoblin Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn For your information, most of the people who disagree with the US war politics are from other countries, and none of those care about wether it is a decromat or republican who mongers for war, I bet some even don't know what the difference between democrats and republicans are. People here are mature and are bashing the politics of Bush and his goverment because they think it is wrong, don't come with that "they only says he does a bad job because he's a republican" stuff. Really? They why won't you show it? Yes, obviously. No one here is defending scum. But a war can be avoided, and anti-war persons like me want to prevent such a horrible action. Surely, no one here likes wars? The actions in Afghanistan was a failure, thousands of innocent lives have gone lost because of it, and the guilty are still free. So why would that be a bad thing? Please come with real arguments instead of baseless and false accusations. But how come he didn't cry for all the people who died because he and his republican friends still allows guns? How come he didn't cry for the people he made sure of was executed, and later was found that they were innocent? And BTW, evil does not exist, the whole idea behind evilness is wrong. Okay... 1. Also people in the U.S disagree with this. If you still think not read some of the other posts again. They have to know what a democrat and Republican is becuase if they didn't know that (not counting litle kids) then the whole world would be in Chaos. Some democrats have done a crappy job notice that when Bush came into office. Outa nowhere we see a FBI agent giving off information to Russia I believe it was then a chain of other little presents. 2.Its common sense that he has weapons. Why did he not let the UN inspectors in for a LONG while. Then he lets them in freely. Kinda werid if you look at it in a diffrent angle. Thats just enough edvidence to really keep a eye on him. 3.No he won't maybe in your fantasy world he might. But he has to risk a few lives to save billions.Those who die are remembered. 4. No one likes wars and it scares me when I think about it. But they attack us. We defend. In science hopefully you heard of a Stimulus. It's whats happening here. DEFENSE. 5. The guilty ones fled and left some behind. They cuased this to happen to the innocent. 7. It wasn't terroism. And as you say "Republican friends" giving guns to everyone they try to bring down these criminals. Trying to stop these people who do crime. 8.Have you been around for the last few years? Cuase this is about evil. BlackDove.... say something worth reading. You should be respectful that Bush is doing the best he can. He is doing a fine job. Next time you post make a little more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Welshman Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 America are bullying britain to go to war with them, imo anyway. I hope Brittain doesnt go to war, partly because I live near a RAF base, but I shouldnt worry too much. Hey A Peanut. Ok that was Not a peanut, yuk. P.s. If its not too late, DO NOT READ THE COLLOR BLIND THREAD, OR CLICK ON THE LINK WITHIN, IT IS REALLY SICK. I realise that colour(Color for u americans) is spelt wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by razorace Name one reasonable energy patent that oil companies have purchased and surpressed. Okay, lets assume you drive....your car's engine runs at about, maybe 30% efficiancy if your car gets really good gas mileage. 30% is about top of the line for an internal combustion engine in a car. However, there has been an engine developed that is 70% efficiant. That would give the average car 70-80 miles to the gallon in city. However you won't find that engine in any cars...and why? Because the person who developed the engine had to sell the patent to someone to get it used, and GM bought it....but GM gets paid by gas companies to not use that engine so they lock up the patent. Of course that's only a small example....but if you dont think that big business gets in the way of technological advancements then you are really naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by TheHobGoblin 4. No one likes wars and it scares me when I think about it. But they attack us. We defend. In science hopefully you heard of a Stimulus. It's whats happening here. DEFENSE. When did Iraq attack us? Ever? I certainly dont remember ever being attacked by Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by TheHobGoblin 2.Its common sense that he has weapons. Why did he not let the UN inspectors in for a LONG while. Then he lets them in freely. Kinda werid if you look at it in a diffrent angle. Thats just enough edvidence to really keep a eye on him. Try to mention one thing about politics that isn't weird. Also, it's still no reason to attack. 3.No he won't maybe in your fantasy world he might. But he has to risk a few lives to save billions.Those who die are remembered. That's the horrible thing: You only think about American casualties! Of course, few of you will die when all you intend is to bomb them down. 4. No one likes wars and it scares me when I think about it. But they attack us. We defend. In science hopefully you heard of a Stimulus. It's whats happening here. DEFENSE. I just say the same as ET Warrior here. 5. The guilty ones fled and left some behind. They cuased this to happen to the innocent. It is only natural that they leave. The action done about Bin Laden should be much better planned if they now are only bombing the people who only happened to live in the same country as him. 7. It wasn't terroism. And why should that matter? And as you say "Republican friends" giving guns to everyone they try to bring down these criminals. Trying to stop these people who do crime. Well, perhaps they try to get fewer criminals, but they are really doing it totally the wrong way. People don't shoot fewer if you give them guns . 8.Have you been around for the last few years? Cuase this is about evil. But the idea behind evil is extremely dangerous, and evil doesn't even excist! Let's take Bin Laden as an example. He is indeed a bastard and quite an idiot, but the point is: He belives he is doing the right thing! He doesn't attack you because he want to see as much innocent people die as possible and laugh evilly about it afterwards! Evilness is not in any people's nature, everyone thinks what they do is the good thing to do! And now the reason why the idea behind evilness is so dangerous. For example WW2. The German soliders didn't go to fight because the wanted to be as much pain to innocents as possible. They fought because they belived that was the good thing to do! Hitler and his mates had convinved the German people that UK and France were evil countries that had oppressed German for many years, and that Germans were the good ones, the nice who only wished well for the world. But of course, this didn't only happen in WW2, actually, almost all wars are fought because each side belives the other side is evil! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 sorry about that double post earlier...i didn't even notice.... But I agree with Qui-Gon on this one...I think all life is sacred, not just American. I dont want anybody to die, and all our pestering and war talk is just going to cause more death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mex Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by GonkH8er Personally, I think America should back the hell off. Bush is just looking for a war. Wants to be a goddamn hero like his daddy. Bush probably loved the Sept 11 attacks after they happened. gave him the oppurtinity to blow the hell out of some stuff. I hope for everyone's sake they just f-ing leave iraq and go home.... You took the words straight out of my mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by ET Warrior Okay, lets assume you drive....your car's engine runs at about, maybe 30% efficiancy if your car gets really good gas mileage. 30% is about top of the line for an internal combustion engine in a car. However, there has been an engine developed that is 70% efficiant. That would give the average car 70-80 miles to the gallon in city. However you won't find that engine in any cars...and why? Because the person who developed the engine had to sell the patent to someone to get it used, and GM bought it....but GM gets paid by gas companies to not use that engine so they lock up the patent. Of course that's only a small example....but if you dont think that big business gets in the way of technological advancements then you are really naive. There's a huge difference between patenting a concept and having a working/affordable system. If such an engine exists, it's probably so technically restricted or expensive that it's not worth putting into mainstream use. As for technological advancement, most of the inventment (in R&D) is made by "big business". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 It was a fully functional working engine, they developed it, and then patented it. they sold it to GM because the developers needed a car company to use the engine. Why would GM even bother to buy the patent if the engine were too expensive to put into mainstream use? It would save a LOT of gas, but the gas companies paid GM to not use it. but i suppose i'll give you another example of big business getting in the way of advancement A while back penicillan was the cure-all drug. It could cure almost any disease around. But then diseases learned how to block the effects of penicillan. But some scientists found out how to create a chemical that blocks their blocking ability, which would make penicillan the cure-all again. Now penicillan is dirt cheap, because it's basically bread mold. But there are huge drug companies who spent billions on research of their specialized drugs, and if penicillan can cure it for five bucks....well, they lose a lot of money. so they bought the patent to the block blocker and it mysteriously never made it's way onto the market. Do you know WHY big business comes out with those technological advances? Because it will profit them. If it's something somebody ELSE came out with and they can stop it, they will because they would lose money. Nearly every single big business is not run on ethics, it is run to make money. They don't care if they aren't helping humanity, they're making themselves rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Well my source for the penicillan is my high schools chemistry teacher, who actually knew one of the guys who helped develop the blocker. The engine is from my physics teacher, who is also the sponsor of our science club, and every year he goes to places like lockheed martin or companies who produce engines.....so he's fairly well informed on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by ET Warrior sorry about that double post earlier...i didn't even notice.... But I agree with Qui-Gon on this one...I think all life is sacred, not just American. I dont want anybody to die, and all our pestering and war talk is just going to cause more death. Assuming that no war results in fewer deaths is a false assumation. A burtal government can kill just as many or far more people than a full blown war. The consern with Iraq is that it's developing weapons that could be used to kill millions in one first strike. Iraq's leaders are proven to be unstable and have used such weapons in the past. (Chemical weapons on the Turks. The reason for the Northern No-Fly Zone.) Do you really need Iraq to turn Israel into glass before you're willing to fight back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 I'm not willing to fight back. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by ET Warrior Well my source for the penicillan is my high schools chemistry teacher, who actually knew one of the guys who helped develop the blocker. The engine is from my physics teacher, who is also the sponsor of our science club, and every year he goes to places like lockheed martin or companies who produce engines.....so he's fairly well informed on the subject. A nonwritten source is invalid. If these patent's exist they should be findable on the web, same with scientific proof that the engine truely is 70% efficent. Plus, the miltary is not legally bond by patent law, if this engine was truely all that and a bag of chips, they'd snap it up fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by ET Warrior I'm not willing to fight back. Period. When I suggest you leave the decisions to up someone that's willing to protect your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 okay then, look on the web and find the patents....i dont care if you do, i believe what they told me because they are reliable sources. And I certainly wouldn't be surprised if military vehicles do run at higher efficiancies than civilian vehicles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 It's pretty hard to find something that doesn't exist. If anyone ever even claimed to have a engine with double the efficent, it would have been ALL over the web and news. Easy. Hell, the press is freaking out over the so called "cloned" human that a alien worshiping cult claims to have created. rrriiiiggghhhhtttt. Tanks, jet, etc. consume gas like it's air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by razorace The consern with Iraq is that it's developing weapons that could be used to kill millions in one first strike. Iraq's leaders are proven to be unstable and have used such weapons in the past. (Chemical weapons on the Turks. The reason for the Northern No-Fly Zone.) Do you really need Iraq to turn Israel into glass before you're willing to fight back? Iraq does first of all not have nukes. Period. If Iraq was so stupid as to attack another middle eastern country (which are the only ones within range), they'd get slaughtered. They know this. While you can argue that since they've done it before, they can do it again, this time there's a lot of focus on them. They will be the ones turned into glass if they so much as twitch the trigger finger one bit. And if you're going to fall back on the fact that Iraq has done bad things before, let me remind you that USA has done worse than that. Far worse. And yes, it's true that the oil industry is hindering scientific progress because they're scared they might be replaced. Ever seen the movie starring Keanu Reaves where they've invented the perfect fuel that only takes water as fuel. The plot is, they get hunted because everyone is afraid of the consequences it'll result in on a global scale. This is exactly what's going to happen if we invented such a thing. Several governments (most likely middle eastern) would try to get rid of it, since their sole survival depends on oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 Originally posted by razorace It's pretty hard to find something that doesn't exist. If anyone ever even claimed to have a engine with double the efficent, it would have been ALL over the web and news. Easy. Hell, the press is freaking out over the so called "cloned" human that a alien worshiping cult claims to have created. rrriiiiggghhhhtttt. Tanks, jet, etc. consume gas like it's air. Go ahead and dont believe me, i really dont care what you believe because it IS true, and you are being naive if you don't believe that our technological process is stopped by big business. And tanks jets, and etc. aren't exactly the same thing as civilian automobiles now are they? If the Army used regular cars to fight wars i can almost gurantee you that they would run at higher efficiancy than ours do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 4, 2003 Share Posted January 4, 2003 :rolls eyes: There's no point arguing with a 100% pacifist. It's like trying to reason with a cultist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 You make it sound like being a pacifist is a BAD thing.......just because i value human life i should be treated as a cultist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.