Slashdot Mirror


User: Eclipse-now

Eclipse-now's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
171
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 171

  1. Re:This just makes sense on Science and Religion Can and Do Mix, Mostly · · Score: 1
    Not if those historic mythologies were never meant to be read literally in the first place! Modern American Christians are too quick to put their post-Darwin glasses on and rush to 'defend' the first few Chapters of Genesis from an 'attack' that is only in their own imaginations. If citizens of the Ancient Middle East (AME) could hear the way modern Creationists carry on, I think they'd be genuinely puzzled. Rather than being a literal construction manual that reduces the Creation narrative to 'what God did when', it's an immensely confronting theological narrative to the Ancient Middle Eastern ear. It's a polemic that undermines the Enuma Elish — what passed then as the Babylonian National Anthem. It runs with the themes of this EARLIER creation myth and turns them on it's head! Instead of there being many gods there is one Supreme Lord, instead of the gods fighting a dreadful battle with the world being leftover bits of the gods hacked off, our Lord just speaks and it happens. Instead of the Stars being gods that must be worshipped and served, they serve us by telling us the time and the seasons! It's all these narratives, and the careful division of the first sentences into repeating sequences of 7 (and multiples of 7) that should alert modern readers to the fact that this is a highly structured, carefully written, and ultimately subversive theological counter-narrative. With all these subtle hermeneutics in play, I cringe for modern American Christians that read it as a literal construction manual about what God cooked up on which day. You gotta be kidding! This not only misses what the passage would have meant to the original audience, but sets up an unnecessary division between Christians and modern science. It makes me sick.
    For more on this try Dr John Dickson, Doctorate of History at Macquarie University, for "The Genesis of Everything".

    Abstract The paper seeks to plot a path through the controversy surrounding the Bible’s opening chapter by examining Genesis 1 in historical context. The author assumes and endorses no particular view of human origins but argues for a literal interpretation of the text, as opposed to what may be called ‘literalistic’. The former reading gives due weight to both the literary genre of Genesis 1 and the cultural milieu of the original writer, whereas the latter gives sufficient attention to neither. Various pre-scientific interpretations of Genesis 1 are described, including those of the first century Jewish intellectual Philo and the great Christian theologian Augustine. In particular, comparisons are drawn with the Babylonian creation epic, Enuma Elish, and it is suggested that Genesis 1 is a piece of ‘subversive theology’, making significant theological points in the light of contemporaneous creation ideas. The questions raised (and answered) by the Bible’s opening chapter concern the nature of the Creator, the value of creation and the place of humanity within the creational scheme. Modern questions concerning the mechanics and chronology of creation may not be appropriately put to the ancient text.

    http://www.iscast.org/journal/articlespage/Dickson_J_2008-03_Genesis_Of_Everything

  2. Re:Clean baseload = science fiction on The Coming Energy Turnaround In Germany · · Score: 1
    James Hansen said:

    "Can renewable energies provide all of society’s energy needs in the foreseeable future? It is conceivable in a few places, such as New Zealand and Norway. But suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy." http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/08/05/hansen-energy-kool-aid/

    Instead of being some necessary evil, I see GenIV nukes as the SABRE that will kill coal. They are Safe, Affordable, Burn Bombs and Waste, are Reliable 24 hours a day, and offer an Enormous hit of power to an energy-hungry world.

    1. SAFE
    New reactor cores are self-cooling. If Homer Simpson falls asleep and doesn't see a Tsunami approaching to wipe out the exterior backup cooling systems, don't panic! Gen4 reactors don't *need* exterior backup cooling systems. While they use better mechanical cooling systems than those at Fukishima, the real genius is that modern reactor cores themselves are the final safety feature. If a Gen4 Integral Fast Reactor core starts to overheat — and all the other powerful cooling systems fail for some horrible set of unfortunate events — something new will happen. The fuel rods will start to expand. As they swell, they start to leak neutrons. This "Neutron Leak" shuts down the nuclear reaction. In Gen4 reactors, the reactor core itself is the final safety switch. We've had this technology since 1986, so the real scandal is that Japan's nukes were not retrofitted with this or other passive safety features.

    Banning nuclear power because of Fukishima is like banning aviation because of the Hindenberg. Fukishima's nukes were 40-year-old Gen2 reactors. We are now up to Gen3.5 and will soon have Gen4 reactors.

    Not only this, but nuclear power has the *best* safety record of *any* major power provider. Hydro dams have burst and wiped out villages, coal kills thousands of people a year through lung and throat cancers and disorders (let alone all the mining accidents around the world — especially in China!) and service men can even fall off the top of wind turbines. People can even die falling off the roof when installing Solar PV. The take home message is *all* power sources contain risks, and yet nuclear power simply has the *best* safety record on a death per terrawatt basis. They can also be built underground for additional safety.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98frSed0F5s&feature=player_embedded#!

    2. AFFORDABLE No one knows exactly what Integral Fast Reactors will finally cost, but here's a few thoughts. Older reactors tend to be one-off projects with all those individual project costs. Think of the difference between a hand-crafted Rolls Royce and a production-line Hyundai. Gen IV Nukes are going modular. They're going up on the production-line, which will crash the costs. Even today's Gen3.5 AP1000 can be put on the assembly line to bring down the costs exponentially. Some estimate tomorrow's Gen4 nukes might just be competitive with coal. And that's today's coal, not tomorrow's post-peak coal economy.

    3. BURNS BOMBS AND WASTE
    Integral Fast Reactors burn nuclear waste and warheads. Today's nukes only burn 0.06% of the energy available in uranium. Tomorrow's Gen4 reactors will burn the rest.

    Nuclear waste is no longer the problem but the SOLUTION to climate change and peak oil. We could run the world for 500 years on the nuclear waste we have today. Indeed, there is so much uranium and thorium on land and especially in our oceans that we could — hypothetically — power the world until the sun expands and wipes out life on earth!

    Now let's think about bombs.
    * IFR’s don’t produce the right material for bombs. The plutonium bred from IFR’s is mixed in with t

  3. On behalf of Australia, I volunteer on Volunteer Towns Sought For Nuclear Waste · · Score: 1

    Hi, my name is "somewhere in the Outback" and I volunteer to take the entire world's nuclear waste! I do this because I am geologically stable. I do this as a ruse though. The waste will never be buried too deep. Instead we'll just store it in cooling ponds until G.E. finally commercializes the S-PRISM. These reactors burn nuclear waste and could run the world for 500 years just on today's waste! Half a millennium of power is worth about $30 trillion dollars! So Australia could then sell the "waste" which will then be fuel back to the world at a massive profit. So pick me pick me! I'm old and wise and waiting for your nuclear waste! http://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/nuclear-posters/

  4. Re:Not surprised... on Followup: Anti-Global Warming Story Itself Flawed · · Score: 1

    As I just shared above, Roy Spencer is a creationist. See this post. http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2355816&cid=36930874

  5. Re:Out of context! on Followup: Anti-Global Warming Story Itself Flawed · · Score: 0
    Um, yeah, but isn't the author of the paper, Roy Spencer is a Creationist that cannot admit an old earth (as far as I understand his version of Creationism — I might have that wrong). However, he *has* signed of on a THEOLOGICAL statement that God designed the world so well that global warming cannot harm it? Did you even read his wiki?

    "We believe Earth and its ecosystems — created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence — are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth's climate system is no exception."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist)

  6. Spend MORE on nukes to save $6 TRILLION! on Cut Down On Nukes To Shave the Deficit · · Score: 1

    The nuclear bombs are $700 billion over 10 years? What about saving $600 billion a year, or $6 TRILLION dollars over 10 years? Would American like that? Here's how, spend MORE on nukes, but nuclear power not nuclear weapons, and get off foreign oil. Do everything you can to electrify transport; electric cars, fast rail, trolley buses. The EIA says peak coal could be around 2030, so it's time to start building out your electric transport systems and Gen3.5 nukes (like the AP1000 that are incredibly safe) and Gen4 nukes that eat waste. (When GE finally releases it's S-PRISM). Whether or not you think spending $700 billion on nuclear BOMBS over 10 years, well, that's up to your defence policy. But I will say that it could make sense to enter more weapons treaties and reduce the global arms by BURNING the bombs in nuclear reactors for clean energy security!

  7. Open Source Hardware uses FOSS on The Best Unknown Open Source Projects · · Score: 1

    Hi, I know these guys have FOSS driving all the electronics on their FOSH. http://opensourceecology.org/

  8. Re:Moving on on German Parliament Backs Nuclear Exit By 2022 · · Score: 1

    Here here! Deaths per terawatt coal is 4000 times worse than nuclear.

  9. Statistics please! on German Parliament Backs Nuclear Exit By 2022 · · Score: 1
    Nuclear power is safe. The Fukishima incident proves so. If that's as bad as it gets, bring on the nuclear age right now! Statistically the deaths per Terawatt hour are 4000 times higher for coal than nuclear. Some even have deaths from wind turbines higher than deaths from nuclear! (Servicemen falling off the wind turbine!) Also, condemning nuclear power wholesale because of Fukishima is like writing off aviation because of the Hindenberg! Fukishima was a Ge2 nuke. We're up to exponentially safer Gen3.5 reactors with passive safety physics where the core can NEVER melt down, and then Gen4 is only a decade away! GenIV nukes are the game changers! They're the Integral Fast Reactors (IFR's) that will EAT nuclear waste and bombs, cannot PRODUCE bombs, and could run the world for 500 years just on today's nuclear waste.

    Just imagine what we might have by 500 years! I say go for IFR's NOW! They are the ONLY economical way to do carbon-free baseload power without bankrupting the economy.

  10. Re:Say waht you will about MS on Bill Gates On Energy · · Score: 1
    ColdWetDog, how expensive is a car?

    Well that would depend if it was hand built as an individual project or whipped up on a factory line wouldn't it?

    We must deploy today’s GenIII reactors immediately. We cannot wait any longer. These GenIII reactors have passive safety features undreamt of in Chernobyl and Fukishima.

    And they have the GenIV feature of being modular. Think about that for a moment. Older nukes were the “Rolls Royce” of the energy world. They were hand-crafted site-constructed expensive beasts! But GenIII reactors can be modularised and put up on the assembly line. Safety systems can be standardised as part of the production line process. It will bring the costs down dramatically, and cuts Rolls Royce costs down to the Hyundai level, while being better than the original.

    Now, GenIV reactors are still my favourite as they burn nuclear waste. They breed it up. I’ve said repeatedly that we have about 500 years of fuel sitting around in cooling ponds, just waiting for GenIV reactors to burn it.

    But it’s not that simple. We don’t have access to all that energy yet. Even if I waved a magic wand and overnight and we had the thousands of GenIV nukes we need, it would still take a few decades to breed up our nuclear waste to the right purity to run them! That is, although we *already* have 500 years worth of nuclear fuel sitting around in our ‘waste’ cooling ponds, it will take a few decades to get at it all as the fuel only doubles every 7 years.

    So build the safe GenIII nukes now, and then we’ll have all the waste we need ready for the GenIV reactors when they finally come off the production line! As a friend over on BNC said,

    "Gen III+ reactors (AP1000, ESBWR) are also largely ‘modular’ with parts built in a factory and assembled on site. We can do this now. New designs should be developed, but there is no need to wait. In 10 years China will be building AP1000 (or their higher-power variant the CAP1400) reactors at rates that will astonish the world. They are building the module factories now."

    We have the technology right now. We can do this! We should build AP1000 assembly lines to fly them out the doors onto the trucks and freight them straight to site for assembly like so much giant-sized Lego. It’s time to do this, and the faster we start the better we’ll cope with peak oil and climate change.

  11. Re:Say waht you will about MS on Bill Gates On Energy · · Score: 1

    This is rubbish! We already have the technnology, Gen3 AP1000's which the Chinese are making modular as we speak. That's nukes on a production line people! Prices will drop. All nukes to this stage have been hand crafted Rolls Royces. Once these modular AP1000's are on the assembly line prices will crash down to 'Hyundai' equivalent prices, yet these guys have safety features Fukishima could only dream of. Then, by the time GenIV reactors are finally coming off their own production lines, we'll have enough once-through-fuel (nuclear waste) to burn for 1000 years.

  12. Robot Cars will change everything! on Volkswagon Shows Off Self-Driving Auto-Pilot For Cars · · Score: 1

    Robot cars will cause major societal revolutions, from doubling how many cars we can fit into a car-park, to drivers never having to visit a public or corporate car-park again, to solving drink driving, to ending car-crashes (or most of them) and saving a million lives a year (worldwide), to even enabling New Urbanism and less cars on the road and changing our relationship to car ownership. Imagine the end of taxi drivers. Imagine cars you can rent instead of buy, but without the human labour component. Everything's going to change! http://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/robot-cars/

  13. Re:Give me alternative energy on Osage Oppose Wind Power At Tallgrass Prairie · · Score: 1

    Energy will be a AND/AND solution. We can't rely on just one source, we need many. Wind power is one of them.

    Can you please explain this statement? GenIV nuclear reactors feed off waste and could run the world for 500 years just on the waste we already have today. They are baseload, load following, and live in concrete bunkers that are pretty much bomb-proof, 9/11 proof, and definitely cyclone proof. But wind turbines only have a 33% capacity factor which means they only work a third of the time, the other 2/3rds are down when we don't decide they need to be down (as when a nuke is getting serviced) but when nature stops blowing, and turbines definitely aren't cyclone proof.

    Sure we need other energy sources such as liquid fuels for cars, but when it comes to electricity, the world's cheapest electricity will come from GenIV nukes built in a modular format on an assembly line, trucked to site and then clipped together on site like so much super-sized lego. AND there's no need to build "super-grids" to shoot solar electricity from one side of a continent to the other or wind back again, so you save there as well. (Let alone the cost of all the huge seaside salt-water hydro dams required to act as giant batteries for the intermittent wind and solar.) Whichever way you look at it, GenIV nukes ARE the silver bullet. And we have enough uranium and thorium on earth to run the world for hundreds of millions of years.

  14. Re:Why not more? on US Pays $2B To Develop Concentrating Solar Power Projects · · Score: 1

    Agreed! Not only is it $708 on defence, but America spends $600 billion a year buying overseas oil. Imagine if Washington mandated a shift to electric cars, fast rail, New Urbanism and above all, GenIV nukes that eat waste and could run America for 1000 years off the nuclear waste you have already collected! GenIV nukes can be load-following, run all day all night all weather all YEAR with no seasonal variation (unless required), and could basically free America from parting with $600 big ones every year. I don't get you guys. You spend $600 billion buying overseas oil, then end up invading Iraq to set up a big police station in the Middle East. Iraq + Annual overseas oil bill = America OFF OIL FOREVER and paying home-grown nuclear & renewable jobs for your OWN energy independence!

  15. Re:Old fans on DC Reboots Universe · · Score: 1

    I have to agree with you sheehaje, the Star Trek retelling was a great job and I hope they go for it with sequels. But — sing it with me —"George Lucas raped my childhood..."

  16. Re:Please explain on No Moon Needed For Extraterrestrial Life · · Score: 1

    ////Stabilization of the axis and climate regions?///// Yep, they are the main reasons I've heard. How do planets without a moon go as far as having a stable axis?

  17. MIB using Global warming to take over the world!!! on New Book Reports Soviets Behind Roswell UFO Scare · · Score: 1
    Climate change is all a Conspiracy organised by the M.I.B. who killed J.F.K, faked the moon landing and stole the alien aircraft from Area 51!!!

    But I’m here to stop them! I will now reveal to the world the presence of this infamous font of infamy! The M.I.B. are actually the Mason’s in Black. You can learn all about them if you just buy my upcoming book, Why climate change is crap and you must fear the M.I.B. instead for just $29.95.

    If you like Why climate change is crap you might also enjoy the sequels,

    More about the M.I.B,
    What you can do about the M.I.B.,
    How to survive the coming M.I.B. take-over,
    Another 100 reasons climate change is rubbish and your local CSIRO lab have also been brought out by the M.I.B., and finally,
    How the M.I.B. fabricated the laws of physics on a universal scale to trick every spectrometer and science student in every lab across the planet, ever. No really. (This last title is a little long but my publishers say it appeals to a very specific market. One has to pay the bills, and what the heck is wrong with that?)

    You’ll probably want to buy the boxed set for only $100. It’s all good science, you can trust me. The fact that I couldn’t get my works published in the peer-reviewed journals only proves how far the M.I.B. have come! Once they have control of our minds, the Rubber Duck underwear laws are soon to follow.

  18. Re:Headline Misleading on Swiss To End Use of Nuclear Power · · Score: 1
    I'm with you 100% Frosty Piss. Now that doesn't mean much, but the *reason* I'm with you is Professor Barry Brook (head of climate at Adelaide University) and Dr James Hansen and a host of others are with you.

    I was a long time anti-nuclear activist. I have changed my whole view of nuclear power since then.

    Anti-nuclear activists present nuclear waste as the problem. This is just not true. GenIV reactors like GE's S-PRISM will burn nuclear waste! We have so much nuclear waste that we could run the world for 500 years on nuclear waste! (And by then, who knows what energy systems we might have?) In other words, nuclear waste is not the problem, it is the SOLUTION to peak oil and climate change.

    GenIV reactors will also have passive safety features that Fukishima just didn't have. Fearing all nuclear power because of Fukishima is like fearing all flight because of the Hindenberg!

    Basically Professor Brook says a vote for renewables only is a vote for climate change to continue BAU. We can't run a wind and solar grid without super-expensive *economy crushing* back up. As Brook says, after a 20 year wind program Denmark is STILL at about 650g Co2 / kwh. After a 10 year nuclear program France is down to 90g!! http://bravenewclimate.com/

  19. Re:What? on Court Clears Novell To Sue Microsoft Over WordPerfect · · Score: 1

    Is word formatting as bad in Word 2010?

  20. Re:How about using the *existing* fusion reactor? on Former Senator Wants to Mine The Moon · · Score: 1

    And solar works how much of the day? Solar PV hitting 'grid parity' is a myth buddy! It's only 'grid parity' if you don't include building 5 or 6 times the solar PV you actually require so you can store the excess energy for when a cloud covers your panel or we encounter that horrible phenomenon known as NIGHT TIME! THEN we also have to include whatever energy storage system you are proposing STORES all that power. Do the math and get back to us on that will ya? Otherwise, a vote for solar PV is just another vote for the coal industry and ever more global warming, asthma, and all the other hideous consequences of burning coal. GenIV nukes that are NOT going to "Fukishima", that burn nuclear waste, and that could run the world for 500 years on today's nuclear waste are THE only answer we have right now! (To think I used to love solar PV about a year ago!) See http://bravenewclimate.com/renewable-limits/ for more, and stop telling us outright LIES about solar PV reaching 'parity'. It only does that in the context of relying on the coal-fired grid you use every time NIGHT happens!

  21. Re:Cart Before The Horse on Former Senator Wants to Mine The Moon · · Score: 1

    I can't stand it when people keep repeating the same tired old myth that nuclear 'waste' will hang around for hundreds of thousands of years, and is this huge terrible *problem*. I really can't stand it, because it reminds me of myself over a year ago, believing the same old crap. The reality is that nuclear waste is not the *problem*, it's the solution! We could FORGET fusion for the lifetime of this planet and still have nuclear fission running in 500 million years! Why? Because GenIV breeder reactors BURN NUCLEAR WASTE! Just today's nuclear waste could run the whole planet's power supply for 500 years! There is a tiny amount of waste left over after re-burning the uranium and plutonium over and over in breeder reactors, but this only has to be stored for 300 years and then is safe. Nuclear 'waste', it's not the problem, it's the solution!

  22. The one problem with LibreOffice... on OpenOffice.org To Be Given Back To the Community · · Score: 1

    ...is their email support! Yuk! An email list? Really? In this day and age of dozens of FOSS forum software they could install on their own servers and have a REAL community up and running? LibreOffice might be the cool hip new version of OO, but seriously guys install a forum! I need help now and then, not being real technical and all, and to post a question to an email list with hundreds of emails to scan through each day is sheer agony.

  23. Re:What happened? on Americans Favor Moratorium On New Nuclear Reactors · · Score: 1

    What kind of super-men do you expect to design, build, run, secure, and maintain these plants? All it takes is one accident, and you've got a disaster on your hands.

    Er, no, someone hasn't been reading. New nukes have passive safety features built into the physics of the plants. Imagine a candle burning away underneath a giant water balloon. What happens when the candle burns too brightly? POP! And the candle goes out. It's a bit like that. The physicists tell me they're like that now. It doesn't matter if Homer Simpson falls asleep. Many fast neutron reactors have some sort of reactor medium fluid in them that slows the neutrons down so they can sustain the nuclear reaction in the other rods. If the fluid overheats, a metal plug melts and the fluid drains away, shutting down the reaction. Another version is actually built into the fuel rods themselves! It's called 'Neutron Leak'. You know how metal expands when it gets hot? Well if these rods get so hot they leave normal operational temperatures, they expand. Hold your hands up in front of your face with your fingers pointing up and held tightly together. That's normal temperatures with the 'closed fingers' catching all the neutrons and enabling the nuclear reaction. Now spread your fingers apart, splayed all over the place. That's the fuel rods expanding, leaking neutrons. The nuclear reaction shuts down. It seems that the 'deadly, scary' fuel rods themselves are now the final safety cut-off switch! How long have we had this? Is this some scary, hot off the press technology that hasn't been thoroughly tested? Nope. We've known how to build 'neutron leak' into fuel rods since the late 1980's —about 30 years. OK? And again, it's passive. No super-human required, not even Homer Simpson is needed to stay awake.

    The fuel itself is dangerous, and remains dangerous for billions of years. Who do you trust to be able to tame something like that? And even if you trust the current engineers and businessmen and politicians to keep it safe, you have to trust those that follow, for the rest of your life (and the lives of those to follow).

    No my friend, that is where you are totally wrong! You need to google Generation IV reactors. The Integral Fast Reactor burns nuclear waste! Do you understand that? The experts tell us that once-through fuel is only 'depleted uranium' that has lost about 0.06% of its energy. In other words, you're talking about storing or burying a fuel source that is MILLIONS of times more energy dense than oil or coal. Rather than being a problem to store for 100 thousand years, nuclear waste is now an energy source! Indeed, with Integral Fast reactors about to come out just the waste we have mined today could RUN THE ENTIRE PLANET FOR 500 YEARS! Did you catch that?

    Nuclear waste; it's not the problem, it's the solution. How's that for a slogan?

    Indeed, it seems the problem is that we don't have enough nuclear 'waste'. (Once through fuel). It takes a few fuel cycles to breed up the uranium into plutonium (of a 'flavour' that cannot make bombs, indeed, these IFR's burn bombs as well!). If we roll IFR's off the production line as fast as I'd like to see them to come off the line, we'll run out of waste. Sure the waste we have today could hypothetically run the world for 500 years, but it has to go through the breeding process, and I forget whether it's 7 or 10 years per doubling period of the fuel cycle but eventually the 'waste' that goes into one plant will run two plants. And then it happens again, and again, until all the uranium is bred up into plutonium and running hot through the IFR's at it's maximum potential. Or some technobabble like that; I don't know the equations and physics, just the English executive summary. (If a scientists can explain it to me in English then I know we BOTH have a chance of understanding it. ;-)

    So the bottom line is that while we wait for the final kinks to be ironed out of GE's S-PRISM GenIV reactor, we sho

  24. Re:Wow, what will THAT outlet look like? on Experimental Batteries Charge In Minutes · · Score: 1

    If we all spin them with the planet, then maybe we can speed the planet up! I've had it with 24 hours, let's see if we can cut it back to 23! ;-)

  25. Well this sucks! on Firefox 4 Released! · · Score: 1

    Just downloaded it to discover it doesn't support my old G5 Mac. Boo hoo!