Quote from Madison:
please do everyone a favor and find some other forum to post to. this is embarassing.
And why's that?
Achilles is a troll - go back and review the posts...
Turok makes a joke about Meyers getting poisoned in a way that recalls the way that Russian guy in England getting radiation poisoning a while back, and also clearly refers to the fact that these numbskulls find a conspiracy theory in everything they find. He also refers to the fact that some of these dummies actually post the totally insane belief - jokingly or not, it's hard to tell with these moonbats - that they think that there's some kind of disinformation campaign being run by the "bigoil/central bankers cartel" to disseminate counter information - and that I'm one of them. Ridiculous....
Anyways, I find it funny and make a post referring to these goofballs - never referring to anyone by name, since Turok and I have had these joke exchanges before, and MOST IMPORTANTLY cuz I wanted to read along and see what the thread was all about and see if there's anything to it, and I didn't want to disrupt the thread. It's an interesting subject.
But Achilles, in his trollish zeal, and cuz he's feeling like I'm calling HIM a CT'er - which I didn't - and because of my comment to Turok, he goes on the attack and makes a derogatory post about me personally. And so, I find him about as useful as tits on a boar hog, and make it known. And for this I'm supposed to be the bad guy?
The real issue here is that libby libs don't really have an interest in making THINGS better. They have an interest in making THEMSELVES feel better by being for all these alternative ways of doing things because on the surface, they seem to be like a good idea. And so, they can get some respect and praise from others that make them FEEL better about themselves, since they're carrying around so much guilt. But upon deeper inspection - like your very correct posts about how there's no free lunch, energy wise, they are exposed as frauds. And when that happens, we see the kind of preemptive post against me like the one the Achilles made cuz he's clearly afraid of facing the possibility that I might call him on this. He was wrong, but in the minds of these guilt ridden idiots, they need to go on the offensive to preempt any questions that might crop up.
But anyways - your posts are the more accurate ones - there's no free lunch as far as energy is concerned. For example, electric cars ARE doable, but it trades one problem - pollution/the political ramifications of relying on oil for another. Namely how do we produce MORE electricity to run these electric cars? Gas turbines produce pollution, and rely on oil, so that's out. Hydroelectric is a great way, but the tree huggers won't let us build more dams. Same with nuclear - tree huggers. Wind - too iffy, never consistent. Tidal - maybe doable, but on the scale neede to make a significant impact on energy needs, might have an impact on the coastal ecology.
And as far as HHO goes, I still have no clear data on either side. It looks like it takes more energy for the electrolysis than the gas gives back.
So, let's call a truce, eh? You guys discuss this all you want. I'll leave you alone. We wouldn't want to see Achilles cry....
