Th reason why we use combustion fuels is because the energy density is amazing. OK, so we use gasoline very inefficiently, and could double our efficiency without altering the shape and size of vehicles, but it is still a very efficient power to weight ratio.
Batteries are inefficient and costly as well as an environmental disaster to produce and recycle.
Maybe if we can make giant low leak capacitors, that would be better, but battery or capacitor, gasoline is still more stable than shorted high current wires in a car crash.
Even with a hybrid, you still got gasoline.
The answer, I think, has to be a clean burning fuel, maybe some form of alcohol. Seriously, in new england at least, we loose every leaf on most of our trees every year. If we were to rake that all up, press the oil out of it and ferment the available sugars, that may be some real energy for combustion.
Wind turbines in every house. Solar panels on the roofs. DC appliances. LED lighting. solid state refrigeration. symbiotic appliances, i.e. refrigerators that extract heat and aid the the devices that produce heat. Like a water heater that is aided by the hot side of the peltier device of the fridge.
"I mean what if God affects the universe, but not in predictable ways. "
The fact that something happened that doesn't make sense or could not be explained. I mean, like a plane about to crash suddenly levitates, or something like that. Something inexplicable and that we know to be "impossible." Any can-man can create a statue of Mary that cries blood. It's been a popular way to con people for hundreds/thousands of years.
"You said it would be interesting if you saw something that couldn't be explained by natural laws."
It would.
"I see magicians do things all the time that APPARENTLY can't be explained by natural laws."
This is a VERY important observation. Every magic trick can be explained. Like all geeks, I guess, I spent some time studying magic. My favorite magicians are Penn & Teller, they can tell you how the trick is done and you still can't see it happening. That's skill.
The problem with god is that if can't do something better than Penn & Teller, I guess he should move back to babylon and give it up.
Magic tricks are not miracles. Making a plane disappear on TV in front of an audience only requires careful planning of camera angles and an audience that can be bribed to act surprised.
Making a real plane levitate under the scrutiny of skeptics is not possible.
Could someone please tell me, clearly, what the problem is?
OK, X.org has not made a release. OK. Lets see, there are a few bugs, OK, what software doesn't have bugs? Are they show stoppers?
We can't use Apple for an example as they control the hardware. So, we are forced to use Microsoft as an example.
Lets look at Vista. Is the graphical rendering system of Vista any more robust than Xorg? I think not. Will that same system in Vista run on as variable a set of hardware? No, Microsoft has removed compatibility for a lot of drivers.
Xorg works and works quite well. Is it perfect? no. Is it more reliable than Windows' graphical engine? yes. Is it more flexible than Vista's graphical interface? Yes.
The only thing missing, quite frankly, is a small amount of eye candy and acceleration for games.
Sorry, I'm having a hard time mustering up any real concern.
Each one leads their respective classes in fuel economy
These machines are only marginally better than their purely gas powered counterparts. Real improvements, 50% to 100% can be made by re-evaluating the way we use fuel.
Chemical batteries will always be inefficient. Worse yet, look at the environmental impact of the a car accident involving these chemicals. Lastly, people are worried about hydrogen dangers? Just imaging what a shard of conducting metal will do as it pierces the plates of a very low internal resistance storage battery. Anyone see the youtube images of the laptop exploding? Imagine that on an automotive scale.
It is a common fact, internal combustion engines waste most of the energy they ignite. The only thing that piston engines use is the expanding gases of combustion, not the more abundant heat.
In fact, we have a whole process for removing this bothersome product.
The piston concept is quite efficient, look at steam engines. Reasonable/manageable speed fantastic torque. Gas engines have the speed and the torque of the steam engine, but none of the efficiency.
hybrids are a joke. The only benefit is regenerative braking, short of that, batteries are terribly inefficient.
We need to add a couple dimensions on to our view of the way we use fuel. If we could use BOTH the expanding gas AND the heat of gasoline, we could probably double the current efficiency. An SUV that gets 25MPG highway, should be able to get 50MPG. (all things being equal)
We can use exhaust gas (EGR) to slow combustion on low RPM, we could use extra oxygen or NO2 to speed combustion on high RPM. Use water vapor pressure generated by the heat to create even more torque.
I don't know where you live, so I can't say 100%, but where I live, my Library is part of a larger network. I can call or email the library, search the whole network on-line, and order what I want and get a call or email when it comes in.
I guess if you walk or ride you bicycle, but that's kinda of difficult for most during bad weather and the winter months.
In rural communities that may be a problem, but in most urban areas the public libraries have multiple "branches." More than that, communities of multiples towns sometimes join forces and provide a common library system.
Where I live, we have one main library and two branches, on top of that our library is in a larger network of libraries. I can get practically any book, CD, or DVD I want for free. I can even call or email the library to get something, and get an email or phone call when it is in. The branch is a couple blocks walk away.
Do I donate to my local libray? You bet I do! The younger generation should really really look closer into their local libraries, it is an AMAZING resource.
To be 100% legal, you would have to either delete the ripped audio.
That was kind of implied, however, I'm not entirely sure that is true.
There are some ambiguous areas in the law around "fair use." If you do not redistribute the music, use it only for your own personal and private use (i.e. not in a commercial venue), and obtain it with proper rights, it may be perfectly legal to keep the copies. Your public library and every thing in it is shared property of your city or town and its residents. This is especially true if you keep only a few songs from the whole CD.
I was talking about this with a lawyer (socially over alcohol, of course) a while back and he thought it was a very interesting point. We laughed about coin-op copying machines in the library as a revenue generation system for copyright infringement being no different than a web site selling ads.
That, however, has not even been prosecuted by RIAA and I don't even know how they would.
Can we now agree that while what you wrote is technically correct, it is also 100% irrelevant to how things are today?
I am frequently frustrated by people's parochial attitudes toward an intellectual discussion. Trying to understand what happened is not condoning it or approval of it. I can analyze and try to understand Ted Bundy without approving or condoning his actions.
For centuries and in many cultures men have been killing their wives for cheating. The point I was trying to make was that it is an old story with old passions and motives. It is an emotional action no matter how intellectually planned and executed. Being in a bad marriage screws with your head. A cheating lover doubly so.
To bring it back to nerds and geeks, it is just that, typically speaking, they are not the most emotionally developed people. Being one of them, it took me to my later 30s, a divorce, and several bad relationships to get a good grip.
People are jumping to the conclusion that I feel sorry for Hans, I don't. My "Poor Hans" was more of an ironic comment. I guess it was misunderstood.
I have been in the software business for a couple decades and I have to tell you, 3rd party tools are typically crap. Open Source/free Software is generally better in quality and, of course, price.
The issue is the investment in using the tools. There is always a learning curve with a new tool. The 3rd party tools typically have crap for documentation and few examples. They almost never out perform the readily available alternatives.
For things like editors, that is a personal choice for many developers. The tools you are used to often make you more productive than new tools with features. I have found it is best to be a minimalist as you can't always have your editor of choice everywhere you work, but vi runs everywhere.
I remember the problems setting up "brief" on every machine years back. After having to do it for several years, I just got sick of spending the time. The vi editor is in every UNIX system and can run on Windows as well.
For things like debuggers, there are some pretty cool features, but I can still get the job done just as fast with printf and gdb.
for things like libraries, that market is dead. In fact, except for a few rare examples, there has never really been a big market. Also, libraries have a double hit in that there is the inevitable learning curve, plus their bugs become your bugs. Open source/free software is a win here as there is almost always a larger development environment around the technology.
Back that up Google for the "Weldon Angelos" case.
I have failed to see any evidence that this WAS a crime of passion. This wasn't a random act of violence against an innocent. The wife was cheating on him and embezzled money from his company. You can't cay it wasn't provoked. I'm not saying it is justified, but surely you can see how it is a very old recipe for murder. Half of the mystery novels in the library play on some form of that scenario.
When a person is in a situation in which they feel trapped, and I'm sure he did. Being in a bad marriage screws with your head. On top of that, kids, money, etc. As another poster put in a different thread, he reached his breaking point.
I can understand what happened, and I think he is less of a danger to society than some ass who does a drive by shooting.
He should be locked away to rot. I don't care if he invented a cure for cancer. He murdered someone and you're just a douche bag.
You read a seriousness to my comment that was not there. It was more ironic than serious.
Never the less, if he's so smart, he should have been able to get away with it. I mean, come on, the police? I don't know about you, but I have police in my family and I've met my share. Not the sharpest tools in the shed.
I mean come on, just how intellectually challenging is standing around drinking coffee and watching construction workers?
Many others will have their breaking-points, and these can too be dangerous to society.
That is probably the most profound part of this discussion. Thanks. The "breaking point" excellent. That the perfect phrase to describe what Hans hit.
People like to create a "for" and "against" in a discussion. I am not "for" Hans at all. I can't even say I can empathize. I can, however, understand what happened. The emotional stress of a cheating wife who embezzles money, and trying to start your own company will drive a lot of people to the breaking point.
That is neither forgiveness nor approval, it is understanding what happened. I hope that is still socially acceptable these days.
Premise: (1) God can affect the universe in ways that can not be explained. That would provide proof that there is a "god" or god-like being. "Q" from TNG comes to mind.
(2) God can not affect the universe outside the laws that govern it, and thus there can be no proof of god.
But if there is a God, isn't it possible that he isn't something you can just express as a theory and use to make predictions? That is option #2.
Nevertheless, you might be hasty in dismissing all of that evidence and instead claiming a complete lack of evidence. If there were a verified miracle, i.e. something that can't be explained, it would be interesting, yes. But, there hasn't and every public claim has been debunked easily.
That's an interesting subject that is debated in Theological as well as Philosophical circles....
Simple "sound-bite" nonsense. This is the problem that science is having. Scientific theories and facts, more often than not, require critical thinking skills merely to participate in a debate. Media tries to dumb down every argument and discussion to some simple and stupid 3 second sound bite or colored graph.
Well, dear world, the problems the confront us today will not be solved with sound bites and simple answers. There will never be 100% consensus and there will never be 100% confidence. We will make mistakes. We will be wrong occasionally. If history tells us anything, the science will be right more often than not, and we'll improve our knowledge as we progress.
(1) X = Water; Y = Flooding (2) X = Carbon Dioxide; Y = Global Warming (3) X = Fire; Y = Fires
#1, water does not cause flooding. Water is what floods, but the cause of flooding is usually something else.
#2 Carbon Dioxide in all probability plays a roll in global warming, but it is necessary for life on earth. The excessive CO2 levels are the problem, not CO2 by itself.
#3 Fires do not cause fires. Combustion can spread to other combustible materials. But a fire in one area does not cause a fire in an other area unless it is basically the same "instance" of combustion.
This won't work. Stop and think how many connections/second bittorrent maintains.... having people confirm each individual connection would be ridiculous.
An encrypted connection with a unique key can cache the agreement and be legally enforcible. I imagine that there would need to be a due diligence on rejecting keys as well.
likely you would still end up spending money to fight the lawsuit that would come along anyways
You'd end up doing that anyway, at least with this method you have a reasonable position that would fend off the typical frivolous attacks.
That would be like the "educational use only" and "law enforcement not allowed" notices on warez sites.
Actually there are some subtle differences. Particularly the notice about private and confidential, and the agreement that you will not do anything illegal.
Secondly, the indemnity clause is vital.
The fundamental point is that you, offering the disclaimer, are doing something which is legal and having people testify that their intent is also legal and that if illegal activity happens, it is because they did it in a way that is unauthorized.
I don't think you can compare global warming with evolution. There is no major global political power struggle happening around evolution
You are kidding, right? Heard the term "Intelligent Design," lately?
The real movers/shakers grabbing political power and driving the direction of law are fundamentally anti-business, anti-consumerism, and therefore, anti-man's-life It doesn't matter if we are happy, it doesn't matter if we live longer, more enjoyable lives.
Really? I don't know anyone that holds that opinion. No one.
I guarantee you that it doesn't matter: even if you were sitting in the dark, in a cold,muddy cave, cooking free-range chicken over a candle, the environmentalists would still claim that your sheer existence is causing negative environmental impact.
They regard humans as unnatural, intruders into Eden. Despoilers of perfection.
Slashdot Mirror
Electricity != Combustion Fuels
Th reason why we use combustion fuels is because the energy density is amazing. OK, so we use gasoline very inefficiently, and could double our efficiency without altering the shape and size of vehicles, but it is still a very efficient power to weight ratio.
Batteries are inefficient and costly as well as an environmental disaster to produce and recycle.
Maybe if we can make giant low leak capacitors, that would be better, but battery or capacitor, gasoline is still more stable than shorted high current wires in a car crash.
Even with a hybrid, you still got gasoline.
The answer, I think, has to be a clean burning fuel, maybe some form of alcohol. Seriously, in new england at least, we loose every leaf on most of our trees every year. If we were to rake that all up, press the oil out of it and ferment the available sugars, that may be some real energy for combustion.
Wind turbines in every house. Solar panels on the roofs. DC appliances. LED lighting. solid state refrigeration. symbiotic appliances, i.e. refrigerators that extract heat and aid the the devices that produce heat. Like a water heater that is aided by the hot side of the peltier device of the fridge.
"I mean what if God affects the universe, but not in predictable ways. "
The fact that something happened that doesn't make sense or could not be explained. I mean, like a plane about to crash suddenly levitates, or something like that. Something inexplicable and that we know to be "impossible." Any can-man can create a statue of Mary that cries blood. It's been a popular way to con people for hundreds/thousands of years.
"You said it would be interesting if you saw something that couldn't be explained by natural laws."
It would.
"I see magicians do things all the time that APPARENTLY can't be explained by natural laws."
This is a VERY important observation. Every magic trick can be explained. Like all geeks, I guess, I spent some time studying magic. My favorite magicians are Penn & Teller, they can tell you how the trick is done and you still can't see it happening. That's skill.
The problem with god is that if can't do something better than Penn & Teller, I guess he should move back to babylon and give it up.
Magic tricks are not miracles. Making a plane disappear on TV in front of an audience only requires careful planning of camera angles and an audience that can be bribed to act surprised.
Making a real plane levitate under the scrutiny of
skeptics is not possible.
Could someone please tell me, clearly, what the problem is?
OK, X.org has not made a release. OK. Lets see, there are a few bugs, OK, what software doesn't have bugs? Are they show stoppers?
We can't use Apple for an example as they control the hardware. So, we are forced to use Microsoft as an example.
Lets look at Vista. Is the graphical rendering system of Vista any more robust than Xorg? I think not. Will that same system in Vista run on as variable a set of hardware? No, Microsoft has removed compatibility for a lot of drivers.
Xorg works and works quite well. Is it perfect? no. Is it more reliable than Windows' graphical engine? yes. Is it more flexible than Vista's graphical interface? Yes.
The only thing missing, quite frankly, is a small amount of eye candy and acceleration for games.
Sorry, I'm having a hard time mustering up any real concern.
Each one leads their respective classes in fuel economy
These machines are only marginally better than their purely gas powered counterparts. Real improvements, 50% to 100% can be made by re-evaluating the way we use fuel.
Chemical batteries will always be inefficient. Worse yet, look at the environmental impact of the a car accident involving these chemicals. Lastly, people are worried about hydrogen dangers? Just imaging what a shard of conducting metal will do as it pierces the plates of a very low internal resistance storage battery. Anyone see the youtube images of the laptop exploding? Imagine that on an automotive scale.
Let's see:
Homophobic anti-atheist organization that sides with MPAA.
Yea, I'd help them. NOT.
It is a common fact, internal combustion engines waste most of the energy they ignite. The only thing that piston engines use is the expanding gases of combustion, not the more abundant heat.
In fact, we have a whole process for removing this bothersome product.
The piston concept is quite efficient, look at steam engines. Reasonable/manageable speed fantastic torque. Gas engines have the speed and the torque of the steam engine, but none of the efficiency.
hybrids are a joke. The only benefit is regenerative braking, short of that, batteries are terribly inefficient.
We need to add a couple dimensions on to our view of the way we use fuel. If we could use BOTH the expanding gas AND the heat of gasoline, we could probably double the current efficiency. An SUV that gets 25MPG highway, should be able to get 50MPG. (all things being equal)
We can use exhaust gas (EGR) to slow combustion on low RPM, we could use extra oxygen or NO2 to speed combustion on high RPM. Use water vapor pressure generated by the heat to create even more torque.
Don't even get me started about home appliances.
And the point still holds, they dont have what i want.
I guess the point "I" was making is that there is no legal or moral way of obtaining that. So, you're on your own I guess.
And ive never seen a bootleg at the library.
A bootleg, by definition, is illegally obtained.
You need to remove the data after the asset is returned to it's owner.
That's kind of one of the the points I was making, if it is owned by the library, it is "public property." So, you have some shared property rights.
also, "format shifting" i.e. ripping for an MP3 player or other device has been upheld as reasonable "fair use."
Except that the local library has nothing i want.
I don't know where you live, so I can't say 100%, but where I live, my Library is part of a larger network. I can call or email the library, search the whole network on-line, and order what I want and get a call or email when it comes in.
Take a closer look!
Wrong, ripping CDs (defeating copy-protection) is illegal under the DMCA.
CDs do not, generally speaking, have copy protection. Besides, format shifting, comes under fair use.
I guess if you walk or ride you bicycle, but that's kinda of difficult for most during bad weather and the winter months.
In rural communities that may be a problem, but in most urban areas the public libraries have multiple "branches." More than that, communities of multiples towns sometimes join forces and provide a common library system.
Where I live, we have one main library and two branches, on top of that our library is in a larger network of libraries. I can get practically any book, CD, or DVD I want for free. I can even call or email the library to get something, and get an email or phone call when it is in. The branch is a couple blocks walk away.
Do I donate to my local libray? You bet I do! The younger generation should really really look closer into their local libraries, it is an AMAZING resource.
To be 100% legal, you would have to either delete the ripped audio.
That was kind of implied, however, I'm not entirely sure that is true.
There are some ambiguous areas in the law around "fair use." If you do not redistribute the music, use it only for your own personal and private use (i.e. not in a commercial venue), and obtain it with proper rights, it may be perfectly legal to keep the copies. Your public library and every thing in it is shared property of your city or town and its residents. This is especially true if you keep only a few songs from the whole CD.
I was talking about this with a lawyer (socially over alcohol, of course) a while back and he thought it was a very interesting point. We laughed about coin-op copying machines in the library as a revenue generation system for copyright infringement being no different than a web site selling ads.
That, however, has not even been prosecuted by RIAA and I don't even know how they would.
Can we now agree that while what you wrote is technically correct, it is also 100% irrelevant to how things are today?
I am frequently frustrated by people's parochial attitudes toward an intellectual discussion. Trying to understand what happened is not condoning it or approval of it. I can analyze and try to understand Ted Bundy without approving or condoning his actions.
For centuries and in many cultures men have been killing their wives for cheating. The point I was trying to make was that it is an old story with old passions and motives. It is an emotional action no matter how intellectually planned and executed. Being in a bad marriage screws with your head. A cheating lover doubly so.
To bring it back to nerds and geeks, it is just that, typically speaking, they are not the most emotionally developed people. Being one of them, it took me to my later 30s, a divorce, and several bad relationships to get a good grip.
People are jumping to the conclusion that I feel sorry for Hans, I don't. My "Poor Hans" was more of an ironic comment. I guess it was misunderstood.
In the U.S.A. the public library legally lends CDs, DVDs, and even, gasp, video cassettes.
Borrow the CD, rip it at the format and audio quality you want, listen to it until you get sick of it, then return the CD for the next person.
100% legal and moral behavior. That, quite frankly, is the purpose of the library.
I have been in the software business for a couple decades and I have to tell you, 3rd party tools are typically crap. Open Source/free Software is generally better in quality and, of course, price.
The issue is the investment in using the tools. There is always a learning curve with a new tool. The 3rd party tools typically have crap for documentation and few examples. They almost never out perform the readily available alternatives.
For things like editors, that is a personal choice for many developers. The tools you are used to often make you more productive than new tools with features. I have found it is best to be a minimalist as you can't always have your editor of choice everywhere you work, but vi runs everywhere.
I remember the problems setting up "brief" on every machine years back. After having to do it for several years, I just got sick of spending the time. The vi editor is in every UNIX system and can run on Windows as well.
For things like debuggers, there are some pretty cool features, but I can still get the job done just as fast with printf and gdb.
for things like libraries, that market is dead. In fact, except for a few rare examples, there has never really been a big market. Also, libraries have a double hit in that there is the inevitable learning curve, plus their bugs become your bugs. Open source/free software is a win here as there is almost always a larger development environment around the technology.
Back that up
Google for the "Weldon Angelos" case.
I have failed to see any evidence that this WAS a crime of passion.
This wasn't a random act of violence against an innocent. The wife was cheating on him and embezzled money from his company. You can't cay it wasn't provoked. I'm not saying it is justified, but surely you can see how it is a very old recipe for murder. Half of the mystery novels in the library play on some form of that scenario.
When a person is in a situation in which they feel trapped, and I'm sure he did. Being in a bad marriage screws with your head. On top of that, kids, money, etc. As another poster put in a different thread, he reached his breaking point.
I can understand what happened, and I think he is less of a danger to society than some ass who does a drive by shooting.
He should be locked away to rot. I don't care if he invented a cure for cancer. He murdered someone and you're just a douche bag.
You read a seriousness to my comment that was not there. It was more ironic than serious.
Never the less, if he's so smart, he should have been able to get away with it. I mean, come on, the police? I don't know about you, but I have police in my family and I've met my share. Not the sharpest tools in the shed.
I mean come on, just how intellectually challenging is standing around drinking coffee and watching construction workers?
Many others will have their breaking-points, and these can too be dangerous to society.
That is probably the most profound part of this discussion. Thanks. The "breaking point" excellent. That the perfect phrase to describe what Hans hit.
People like to create a "for" and "against" in a discussion. I am not "for" Hans at all. I can't even say I can empathize. I can, however, understand what happened. The emotional stress of a cheating wife who embezzles money, and trying to start your own company will drive a lot of people to the breaking point.
That is neither forgiveness nor approval, it is understanding what happened. I hope that is still socially acceptable these days.
Premise:
(1) God can affect the universe in ways that can not be explained. That would provide proof that there is a "god" or god-like being. "Q" from TNG comes to mind.
(2) God can not affect the universe outside the laws that govern it, and thus there can be no proof of god.
But if there is a God, isn't it possible that he isn't something you can just express as a theory and use to make predictions?
That is option #2.
Nevertheless, you might be hasty in dismissing all of that evidence and instead claiming a complete lack of evidence.
If there were a verified miracle, i.e. something that can't be explained, it would be interesting, yes. But, there hasn't and every public claim has been debunked easily.
That's an interesting subject that is debated in Theological as well as Philosophical circles....
Easter bunnies.
Simple "sound-bite" nonsense. This is the problem that science is having. Scientific theories and facts, more often than not, require critical thinking skills merely to participate in a debate. Media tries to dumb down every argument and discussion to some simple and stupid 3 second sound bite or colored graph.
Well, dear world, the problems the confront us today will not be solved with sound bites and simple answers. There will never be 100% consensus and there will never be 100% confidence. We will make mistakes. We will be wrong occasionally. If history tells us anything, the science will be right more often than not, and we'll improve our knowledge as we progress.
(1) X = Water; Y = Flooding
(2) X = Carbon Dioxide; Y = Global Warming
(3) X = Fire; Y = Fires
#1, water does not cause flooding. Water is what floods, but the cause of flooding is usually something else.
#2 Carbon Dioxide in all probability plays a roll in global warming, but it is necessary for life on earth. The excessive CO2 levels are the problem, not CO2 by itself.
#3 Fires do not cause fires. Combustion can spread to other combustible materials. But a fire in one area does not cause a fire in an other area unless it is basically the same "instance" of combustion.
This won't work. Stop and think how many connections/second bittorrent maintains.... having people confirm each individual connection would be ridiculous.
An encrypted connection with a unique key can cache the agreement and be legally enforcible. I imagine that there would need to be a due diligence on rejecting keys as well.
likely you would still end up spending money to fight the lawsuit that would come along anyways
You'd end up doing that anyway, at least with this method you have a reasonable position that would fend off the typical frivolous attacks.
That would be like the "educational use only" and "law enforcement not allowed" notices on warez sites.
Actually there are some subtle differences. Particularly the notice about private and confidential, and the agreement that you will not do anything illegal.
Secondly, the indemnity clause is vital.
The fundamental point is that you, offering the disclaimer, are doing something which is legal and having people testify that their intent is also legal and that if illegal activity happens, it is because they did it in a way that is unauthorized.
I don't think you can compare global warming with evolution. There is no major global political power struggle happening around evolution
You are kidding, right? Heard the term "Intelligent Design," lately?
The real movers/shakers grabbing political power and driving the direction of law are fundamentally anti-business, anti-consumerism, and therefore, anti-man's-life It doesn't matter if we are happy, it doesn't matter if we live longer, more enjoyable lives.
Really? I don't know anyone that holds that opinion. No one.
I guarantee you that it doesn't matter: even if you were sitting in the dark, in a cold,muddy cave, cooking free-range chicken over a candle, the environmentalists would still claim that your sheer existence is causing negative environmental impact.
They regard humans as unnatural, intruders into Eden. Despoilers of perfection.
This is pure hogwash.
Well, a burning bush that doesn't get consumed by the fire would definitely be accepted.
I'm sure Penn & Teller could figure out how to make that look like it is happening.