Especially with global warming in process, this will only accelerate, and is in fact a navigational hazard.
And yes, I do accept that global warming is real, and unstoppable. I have some doubts that humans caused it entirely, but the facts that it is occurring and that we may well have played some role in making it worse are undeniable. But it's far too late for the blame game. The only real solution is to start planting more food.
OH, I see, you don't understand the difference between rational and irrational religion, and so generalize the two into an incorrect and superstitious stereotype.
I think what you've missed is the fact that Catholicism *actually strives to be rational* and *describe observed effects*. See Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI's speech at Regansburg (widely available at your favorite search engine) or the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate for the theological method used.
And I ended up in engineering because of the Dunning-Kruger effect. So much easier than either theology or science, which requires a much bigger ego than I will ever possess.
The Big Bang Theory proves the existence of God. It was, after all, invented by a Catholic Priest. It proves that this universe, this "slice of the mind of God", had a beginning, and that in that beginning, were the constants that were necessary for the creation of the entire universe.
You need to google the scientific method if you think it has anything to do with "proven fact" (which isn't possible under, gasp, the scientific method).
I find Star Trek technical manuals to be exceedingly well written on the subject of ergonomics. So much so that one day I'd love to design a house based on them.
Oddly enough, MY question was answered, without ever being selected for answer, in such a way that I'm going to be posting this link to several Catholic and atheist blogs later.
But I don't understand why Japan doesn't perfect Deep water cooling technology, using heat exchanges and thermocouples to generate energy. Or is the Inland Sea not deep enough?
In a lot of cases, I've seen the same people who install red light cameras shorten the yellow interval to half what it once was. They are companies out to make a profit, after all.
If you plant 100% of the biosphere with non-poisonous fauna, and erradicate the poison fauna, then simple math gives you the ability to feed 80 billion with NO industrialization whatsoever (based on an acre per person and excluding areas that will not support plant life).
Even at 7 billion, the factory industrialized farms have to cut production to keep food prices high enough to make it profitable. Last year, we THREW AWAY enough spoiled food to feed 15 billion people.
Famines have been *artificial* for about 150 years now.
Slashdot Mirror
But that methane doesn't *stay* at the bottom of the ocean:
http://www.neatorama.com/2010/08/08/bermuda-triangle-mystery-solved/
Especially with global warming in process, this will only accelerate, and is in fact a navigational hazard.
And yes, I do accept that global warming is real, and unstoppable. I have some doubts that humans caused it entirely, but the facts that it is occurring and that we may well have played some role in making it worse are undeniable. But it's far too late for the blame game. The only real solution is to start planting more food.
OH, I see, you don't understand the difference between rational and irrational religion, and so generalize the two into an incorrect and superstitious stereotype.
Thank you, right information, just from wikipedia articles alone.
Yours:
"The average depth is 37.3 m (122 ft); the greatest depth is 105 m (344 ft)."
Mine:
"To obtain water in the 3 to 6 C (37 to 43 F) range, a depth of 66 m (217 ft) is required."
Looks like it is possible, but only certain cities could do it.
Converting Methane (a greenhouse gas 25 times as dense as CO2) to CO2 and energy is a bad idea how?
Especially given that global warming is now a runaway process.
Still, I'd say that deep water cooling would be a much better tech to develop for the long run.
You can fix that by planting a rain forest or six.
s/religion/irrational religion/
I think what you've missed is the fact that Catholicism *actually strives to be rational* and *describe observed effects*. See Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI's speech at Regansburg (widely available at your favorite search engine) or the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate for the theological method used.
And I ended up in engineering because of the Dunning-Kruger effect. So much easier than either theology or science, which requires a much bigger ego than I will ever possess.
"So it was because the Pope demonstrated that Galileo's calculations were incorrect that he was found guilty of heresy and died under house arrest?"
Yes. I don't care what you think. because you believe in a lie. We have the records of the Inquisition to prove it.
The Big Bang Theory proves the existence of God. It was, after all, invented by a Catholic Priest. It proves that this universe, this "slice of the mind of God", had a beginning, and that in that beginning, were the constants that were necessary for the creation of the entire universe.
Only children thing God is " a bearded man who lives on an imaginary mountain who controls the phenomena with his magic staff".
All rational religions observe and model. And the worst Galileo was ever threatened with, was house arrest (which happened).
By that definition of knowledge, our species is incapable of knowledge.
You need to google the scientific method if you think it has anything to do with "proven fact" (which isn't possible under, gasp, the scientific method).
Funny how the Catholic Church agrees with you on that:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2111.htm
" It is possible that another million years of human evolution will change this game entirely. "
Unfortunately, it appears United States Progressive Atheism is not evolutionary viable:
http://www.amazon.com/What-Expect-When-Ones-Expecting/dp/1594036411
And neither of those examples, are rational religion.
"Even an unpopular person with an unpopular theory can (possibly) demonstrate that his theory give correct predictions."
Name three.
I find Star Trek technical manuals to be exceedingly well written on the subject of ergonomics. So much so that one day I'd love to design a house based on them.
Oddly enough, MY question was answered, without ever being selected for answer, in such a way that I'm going to be posting this link to several Catholic and atheist blogs later.
Are now designed or were designed?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
There are a LOT of better designs out there now that in a really severe earthquake or storm, would self-compartmentalize.
But I don't understand why Japan doesn't perfect Deep water cooling technology, using heat exchanges and thermocouples to generate energy. Or is the Inland Sea not deep enough?
So more like the old ham radio connected to a modem setups, where anybody on the correct frequency could listen?
In a lot of cases, I've seen the same people who install red light cameras shorten the yellow interval to half what it once was. They are companies out to make a profit, after all.
If you plant 100% of the biosphere with non-poisonous fauna, and erradicate the poison fauna, then simple math gives you the ability to feed 80 billion with NO industrialization whatsoever (based on an acre per person and excluding areas that will not support plant life).
Even at 7 billion, the factory industrialized farms have to cut production to keep food prices high enough to make it profitable. Last year, we THREW AWAY enough spoiled food to feed 15 billion people.
Famines have been *artificial* for about 150 years now.
How can a product be a copy cat when it is *better* and *more innovative* than the original?