[Vo]:Possibly Earthlike planet only 20 l.y. away!
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/25/science/space/25planet.html?_r=1ref=scienceoref=slogin New Planet Could Be Earthlike, Scientists Say By DENNIS OVERBYE Published: April 25, 2007 The most enticing property yet found outside our solar system is about 20 light-years away in the constellation Libra, a team of European astronomers said yesterday. The astronomers have discovered a planet five times as massive as the Earth orbiting a dim red star known as Gliese 581. It is the smallest of the 200 or so planets that are known to exist outside of our solar system, the extrasolar or exo-planets. It orbits its home star within the so-called habitable zone where surface water, the staff of life, could exist if other conditions are right, said Stephane Udry of the Geneva Observatory. We are at the right place for that, said Dr. Udry, the lead author of a paper describing the discovery that has been submitted to the journal Astronomy Astrophysics. But he and other astronomers cautioned that it was far too soon to conclude that liquid water was there without more observations. Sara Seager, a planet expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said, For example, if the planet had an atmosphere more massive than Venus's, then the surface would likely be too hot for liquid water. Nevertheless, the discovery in the Gliese 581 system, where a Neptune-size planet was discovered two years ago and another planet of eight Earth masses is now suspected, catapults that system to the top of the list for future generations of space missions. On the treasure map of the universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an X, said Xavier Delfosse, a member of the team from Grenoble University in France, according to a news release from the European Southern Observatory, a multinational collaboration based in Garching, Germany. Dimitar Sasselov of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who studies the structure and formation of planets, said: It's 20 light-years. We can go there. The new planet was discovered by the wobble it causes in its home star's motion as it orbits, using the method by which most of the known exo-planets have been discovered. Dr. Udry's team used an advanced spectrograph on a 141-inch-diameter telescope at the European observatory in La Silla, Chile. The planet, Gliese 581c, circles the star every 13 days at a distance of about seven million miles. According to models of planet formation developed by Dr. Sasselov and his colleagues, such a planet should be about half again as large as the Earth and composed of rock and water, what the astronomers now call a super Earth. The most exciting part of the find, Dr. Sasselov said, is that it basically tells you these kinds of planets are very common. Because they could stay geologically active for billions of years, he said he suspected that such planets could be even more congenial for life than Earth. Although the new planet is much closer to its star than Earth is to the Sun, the red dwarf Gliese 581 is only about a hundredth as luminous as the Sun. So seven million miles is a comfortable huddling distance. How hot the planet gets, Dr. Udry said, depends on how much light the planet reflects, its albedo. Using the Earth and Venus as two extreme examples, he estimated that temperatures on the surface of the planet should be in the range of 0 degrees to 40 degrees centigrade. It's just right in the good range, Dr. Udry said. Of course, we don't know anything about its albedo. One problem is that the wobble technique only gives masses of planets. To measure their actual size and thus find their densities, astronomers have to catch the planets in the act of passing in front of or behind their stars. Such transits can also reveal if the planets have atmospheres and what they are made of. Dr. Udry said he and Dr. Sasselov would be observing the Gliese system with a Canadian space telescope named MOST to see if there are any dips in starlight caused by the new planet. Failing that, they said, the best chance for more information about the system lies with the Terrestrial Planet Finder, a NASA mission, and the Darwin missions of the European Space Agency, which are designed to study Earthlike planets, but have been delayed by political, technical and financial difficulties. We are starting to count the first targets, Dr. Udry said. -- Michel
[Vo]:GENERAL ....vortex Digest V2007 #202 Bill Beatty
Dear Vo.,
A cut and cut... and some paste, comment:
GENERAL
In general,as there may be a comment it seems as though the
armchair science community find a difficulty in and of a responce,
rejoinder...
SO: As a favor I ask PLEASE to RSVP this little note
And rejoin with not an arm chair guesikation but some real
stuff.
\\ Here is are a critique and question '''grouping
On 4/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
vortex-digest DigestVolume 2007 : Issue 202
Q:
However on a more practical note
.eve that Free Energy is possible with solid state electrical equipment
where the energy is either created or tapped from a vast unseen reservoir.
How about a well known and well understood vast body of energy ???
On 4/3/07, Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Naturally, I have mixed feelings about nuclear power. I think everyone on
Vortex does -- this is a technically knowledgable group
...knowledgable is a word that should have been clubbed to death
years ago
when it started crawling about like the late Lon Cheney...
I may be could be
could be wrong ..
! And if only they *had* honored the truth,
:: Who is are the they
YOU... the arm chair commenters. ARE the THEY
of re-occuring time after time, and being covered up.
stupid thing to do.
- Jed
Thomas wrote..
He did mention a theory of everything. I searched it, as far as I can
tell, it applies to particle physics. He said that a researcher at the U
of M is working on it.
-
UH. the Theory of everything means:
This is the guess ..of everything
SO.
BBGB . Does ANYONE wish to share the Anything of
Anything
M HMMM ???
Jed wrote..
Engineers are supposed to tell the truth!
JED-- I wish you would reveal any work you
YOU as a person have done Please
=
.. ask any college kid.
=
I wish any of you WOULD ask a real college kid... about the nature of the
text on Vo.
As little does a royal lady dream
That Rumpelstiltskin is my name!
Alternatively, you know what they say about flying... It's really
not too dangerous when you're in the air. The only problems are when
you are near the ground
I do not worry about the danger. I just do not like being crammed
into a small, smelly cabin with bad food, air pressure changes, and
all these invasive procedures against terrorism. The latest invasive
procedure is to look at you naked with an x-ray machine. See:
http://www.slate.com/id/2160977/
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/02/24/us/24scan.jpg
I like to get up, stroll around, buy a cuppa java, look out the
window and see something . . . The fast trains in France and Japan
are great. If I could go all the way to Japan (6870) by fast train in
19 hours, I would never take a 14-hour flight. It is a shame they
cannot make trains run on water.
What I would really like to experience is a flight on a Zeppelin.
- Jed
Rhong Dhong wrote:
It's no longer possible to have something like that in the US. One
suicide bomber will be all it takes to justify turning the screws some
more.
The commute will then include the need for each passenger to go
through a search . . .
Not a problem. It would take a huge bomb to destroy a fast train, or
make it derail. Much bigger than it takes to destroy an airplane. Of
course a small bomb would kill some people, but it would be no worse
than an attack in a shopping mall. We are not going to set up
searches at every shopping mall or other crowded place. Even the
Israelis do not do that, and they have much more to worry about than
Americans.
Note that Amtrak trains already limit the number of bags, and they do
have a rudimentary search. The French and Japanese trains do not.
If anything, concerns about terrorism will increase the appeal of trains.
- Jed
Jed sez:
...
I like to get up, stroll around, buy a cuppa java, look
out the window and see something . . . The fast trains
in France and Japan are great. If I could go all the way
to Japan (6870) by fast train in 19 hours, I would never
take a 14-hour flight. It is a shame they cannot make
trains run on water.
What I would really like to experience is a flight
on a Zeppelin.
- Jed
So would I.
Not all that long ago I saw a wonderful article (I think it was published in
either Popular Science or Popular Mechanics) on the conceptual design of a
heavier than air zeppelin using 21st century state of the art technology.
I think it was powered by a combination of solar cells and rechargeable
batteries powering a series of electric props positioned along the sides.
(Come to think of it, with NanoSolar's printed flexible solar film
technology just around the
[Vo]:Oh!!!???
Dear Vo., I must speak up at my father, a language teacher born in 1899 would have prompted me: [1] there is are no quote and end quote one may open and close a quote but not end a quote... [2] She or he SAID... not SAYS. OK? [3] From JHS: May you all you all PLEASE BBGB PLEASE try even just TRY to think about science... as opposed to she said she said he said they said... sais says said.??? PLESE?? [4] Can anyone [oh come just one on one of you all you all on you lurkers] EVEN Try some kind of thinking real world science: (A) Thanks to John Steck
Re: [Vo]:GENERAL ....vortex Digest V2007 #202 Bill Beatty
- Original Message - From: john herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:36 AM Subject: [Vo]:GENERAL vortex Digest V2007 #202 Bill Beatty .eve that Free Energy is possible with solid state electrical equipment where the energy is either created or tapped from a vast unseen reservoir. How about a well known and well understood vast body of energy ??? The sun? Jed wrote.. Engineers are supposed to tell the truth! JED-- I wish you would reveal any work you YOU as a person have done Please Jed does an enormous work as CF's librarian and most vocal advocate, plus he is one of the most scientifically literate science writers I know. ... Not all that long ago I saw a wonderful article (I think it was published in either Popular Science or Popular Mechanics) on the conceptual design of a heavier than air zeppelin using 21st century state of the art technology. I think it was powered by a combination of solar cells and rechargeable batteries powering a series of electric props positioned along the sides. (Come to think of it, with NanoSolar's printed flexible solar film technology just around the corner, I think it's an even better bet.) It looked like a very FAT blimp filled with helium. The beauty of the concept was that when you cut the power it would simply float back to the ground, or body of water for that matter. Only when the electric props were actively engaged would there be enough air lift to get it off the ground - and on to infinity! The conceptual images indicated to me that there would be sufficient passenger space (particularly on the observational deck) to make one feel as if they were strolling about on a cruse ship. What a view! Think The Fifth Element and you get the picture. No warp drives, however, at least not in the current model. I think it cruses at around 100 - 150 MPH. I suspect the only thing holding them back are the old unjustified Hindenburg fears. The only concern I would personally harbor would be how it would negotiate its substantial girth through nasty cold fronts and other bad weather. Regardless, I'd love to see them frolicking above. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com http://www.orionworks.com/ So would I! At least those things can stay aloft without emitting GHGs! I doubt bad weather can be a real problem, or the old times zeps would necessarily have had problems while crossing the Atlantic, as weather forecasts were probably much shorter term than crossing times. Michel
Global climate calculator (was Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases)
Ed's argument is indeed quite pertinent. Terry, you will find a freely downloadable ready-made climate calculator here: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/download/ It's a so-called global climate calculator i.e. it also takes into account the oceans (how accurately I don't know), not just the atmosphere and the radiative balance. The tutorial here explains how to use it to determine the effects of CO2 variations: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/outreach/exercises/global_warming.html Michel - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:18 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases Terry Blanton wrote: Half way down. In 1960 CO2 was 310 ppm. Now it's 380 ppm. This causes drastic changes in climate?!? Yes, it does. This reminds me of the idiotic comment by Michael Crichton that Terry Blanton quoted here in 2005: Imagine the composition of the Earth's atmosphere as a football field. Most of the atmosphere is nitrogen. So, starting from the goal line, nitrogen takes you all the way to the 78 yard line. And most of what's left is oxygen. Oxygen takes you to the 99 yard line. Most of what remains is the inert gas argon. Argon brings you within 3 1/2 inches of the goal line. That's pretty much the thickness of the chalk stripe. And how much of the remaining three inches is carbon dioxide? One inch. You are told carbon dioxide has increased in the last 50 years. Do you know how much it has increased, on our football field? Three-eighths of an inch -- less than the thickness of a pencil. Yet you are asked to believe that this tiny change has driven the entire planet into a dangerous warming pattern. Ed Storms wrote an excellent rebuttal: An interesting point. This same point can be made about cyanide. An average person weighs about 80,000 gm. It takes about 50 mg of NaCN to kill an average person, which is only 0.0022 inches on the football field. Obviously, a person can not be harmed by such a small distance. No wonder the average person has no understanding of the real world when this kind of argument is used. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Read posts before replying, PLEASE
Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: To all, and some in particular, and some not in particular Please READ people's posts before posting replies. That means the whole damned thing, whether or not you agree with it. If you do not take the time to read the entire thing, either because you are too lazy to do so, or because the content disgusts you, then you do not have the necessary courage or fortitude to make a decent reply. Period. Exclamation point. At sign. Divide by. (you get the point I suppose) Case in point: Jeff Fink was attacked for being supposedly on the side of the oil companies. He specifically stated in more than one post that he is all for getting OFF of the addiction to oil. Stop attacking people when you do not read the entire post. Please no offense intended, but your email is blatant Ad hominem and hate. Global Warming is vitally important. If Jeff made huge errors then a person has every write to show Jeff his errors and not have to worry hurting Jeff's feelings. I'm certain Jeff is strong and can take truth, especially when it comes to a vitally important topic as Global Warming. Again, WHY is it that the side which questions Global Warming as caused by technology the polite and thoughful side, That's your interpretation. yet the majority (not all, some are OK) of the pro-industrial caused Global Warming side is really beginning to paint themselves as hateful scumbags who do not give a damn what happens to the working class people, Kyle, *please* refrain from name-calling and ad hominem remarks. Working class people? Is that all you're concerned about, the financial state of working class people (the almighty $$$) when humanity is generating an upcoming Ice Age that could wipe millions of beautiful and priceless species and perhaps even humanity off the face of this beautiful planet??? ... Unbelievable! as long as Owl Gore is A-OK, and his carbon credits too. I very much admire Al Gore who is trying to educate people on Global Warming in an attempt to help save this planet. Inevitably, it seems, any attempt to discuss what is going on scientifically becomes a gaggle of ultra-liberals swooping down to brand everything as partisan or political. Please Kyle, lets not get all bent up because present evidence is overwhelming that humanity is the major cause of Global Warming. Yet one more time I'll be more than happy to discuss the facts with you. CO2 levels have cycled through out the hundreds of thousands of years. Take a look at the chart. Then humanity arrives and CO2 levels skyrocket to ~5 times any known CO2 level. What about the recent vast project where scientists entered every known related effect in NASA's supercomputer that shows humanity is the cause of Global Warming. Did you see the computer generated graph? It matches the graph of real data! What about recent Global Warming television documentary programs that state 99% of the science community related to this field with over 2000 scientists now agree Global Warming is caused by humanity. Please brother, lets get past the almighty buck *on just this one* and take responsibility. Next time you go hiking look at God's creatures eye to eye and tell me your don't care enough to take blame. Next, the neo-cons emerge from their lairs and counterattack with remarks that make the first group of idiots look right. No science then gets discussed. I have done nothing but show data and correct blatant errors of those who oppose GW caused by humanity. Sorry, your email is blatant Ad hominem completely lacking any scientific data filled with name-calling and hate. The working class are still left driving the evil automoblile, and no one says, hey, lets make some real world, nuts and bolts engineering to actually DO something about this, and help the little guy out in the process. Countless species and lives are at stake here and you attack people because you don't want to hurt the financial well being of the so-called little guy ??? We are all trying to help, but first people need educating so they can at least accept the fact that humanity is the cause and what caused such Global Warming! Regards, Paul Lowrance Also, why are we bringing religion and religious prophecy into this? This is supposed to be about science, not theology. A couple personal points: To Paul Lowrance: the above is not directed at you. Though I disagree with you on the issue of Global Warming, your posts have been quite polite and civililzed, and I thank you for that. And, regardless of whether or not we agree or disagree on GW, I am right here with you in wanting to see the end of the oil-burning age. Maybe a thread should be begun to discuss real world solar/etc., how we can make it cheap, ideas, experiments on such, etc.? To Dr. Mitchell Swartz: Your post was brief, but very good, in my opinion. I for one am glad you are still on the
[Vo]:Re: Global climate calculator (was Re: Atmospheric Gases)
It's a so-called global climate calculator Sorry I meant global climate model (GCM): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_climate_model Other article of interest (explains the mechanism of IR absorption by the CO2 molecules): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect Michel - Original Message - From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 1:06 PM Subject: Global climate calculator (was Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases) Ed's argument is indeed quite pertinent. Terry, you will find a freely downloadable ready-made climate calculator here: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/download/ It's a so-called global climate calculator i.e. it also takes into account the oceans (how accurately I don't know), not just the atmosphere and the radiative balance. The tutorial here explains how to use it to determine the effects of CO2 variations: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/outreach/exercises/global_warming.html Michel - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:18 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases Terry Blanton wrote: Half way down. In 1960 CO2 was 310 ppm. Now it's 380 ppm. This causes drastic changes in climate?!? Yes, it does. This reminds me of the idiotic comment by Michael Crichton that Terry Blanton quoted here in 2005: Imagine the composition of the Earth's atmosphere as a football field. Most of the atmosphere is nitrogen. So, starting from the goal line, nitrogen takes you all the way to the 78 yard line. And most of what's left is oxygen. Oxygen takes you to the 99 yard line. Most of what remains is the inert gas argon. Argon brings you within 3 1/2 inches of the goal line. That's pretty much the thickness of the chalk stripe. And how much of the remaining three inches is carbon dioxide? One inch. You are told carbon dioxide has increased in the last 50 years. Do you know how much it has increased, on our football field? Three-eighths of an inch -- less than the thickness of a pencil. Yet you are asked to believe that this tiny change has driven the entire planet into a dangerous warming pattern. Ed Storms wrote an excellent rebuttal: An interesting point. This same point can be made about cyanide. An average person weighs about 80,000 gm. It takes about 50 mg of NaCN to kill an average person, which is only 0.0022 inches on the football field. Obviously, a person can not be harmed by such a small distance. No wonder the average person has no understanding of the real world when this kind of argument is used. - Jed
[Vo]:unsubscribe
Consolidating to Gmail --- Steven Vincent Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://orionworks.com
Re: [Vo]:Zepplins and weather
Michel Jullian wrote: Some of the applications are quite interesting though. The designs under development section features an original airship to orbit project based on V shaped blimps, sort of advanced weather balloons meant to go to the top of the atmosphere and beyond: http://www.jpaerospace.com/ That's astounding! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zepplins and weather
Michel Jullian wrote: Some of the applications are quite interesting though. The designs under development section features an original airship to orbit project based on V shaped blimps, sort of advanced weather balloons meant to go to the top of the atmosphere and beyond: http://www.jpaerospace.com/ That's astounding! - Jed I second that. Great photos. It would not suprise me in the least that a good chunk of the current research may have originated, at least initially, from DOD spin-off. Triangular V shaped UFOs have been one of the most commonly reported objects for decades. But don't quote me on that. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: [Vo]:Zepplins and weather
hmmm http://www.worth1000.com/entries/210500/210623UaDY_w.jpg Harry
Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases
In reply to leaking pen's message of Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:36:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] now, the mechanism is likely a global warming, causing ice cap melting and a change in albedo, causeing cooling, leading to ice age, thats Since ice is more reflective than water, when the ice melts, the Earth absorbs more heat, not less. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases
except water is still reflective, more reflective than land, and large amounts of land surface become water, yes? On 4/25/07, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In reply to leaking pen's message of Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:36:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] now, the mechanism is likely a global warming, causing ice cap melting and a change in albedo, causeing cooling, leading to ice age, thats Since ice is more reflective than water, when the ice melts, the Earth absorbs more heat, not less. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant. -- That which yields isn't always weak.
Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Gases
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to leaking pen's message of Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:36:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] now, the mechanism is likely a global warming, causing ice cap melting and a change in albedo, causeing cooling, leading to ice age, thats Since ice is more reflective than water, when the ice melts, the Earth absorbs more heat, not less. That's true. A scientist talked about that in GLOBAL WARMING: What You Need To Know with Tom Brokaw. This scientist is working at the poles. Furthermore, he said over the years on average significant amount of land that used to covered by ice is now absorbing more radiation that the ice that used to cover such land. These are factors the recent computer simulation software takes into effect. leaking pen wrote: except water is still reflective, more reflective than land, and large amounts of land surface become water, yes? If Ice is over land: Ice that melts over land is absorbed in the soil. This results in more radiation absorption the ice. If Ice is in water: Ice that melts in the ocean results in more radiation absorption because water absorbs more radiation than water. Regards, Paul Lowrance
Re: [Vo]:Read posts before replying, PLEASE
Yes - I've had a few run-ins with people who (a) have never been inside a factory let alone gotten their hands dirty in one, and (b) have no idea what it's like to be an hourly paid working dude, most times at the mercy of trends. Then there's the joy of shift-work... My own take on energy - I'm in the Cold Fusion arena, at least as a support person - is to bring Cold Fusion to the people; the real people, that is, who often have an intuitive wisdom far greater than the overly educated. Bring Cold Fusion to the people in the form of solid, practical applications, and they'll buy into it. Do NOT bring cold fusion to the government or academia, for some kind of approval (or funding), because both will (and have) talk it to death. P. - Original Message From: Kyle R. Mcallister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:47:40 PM Subject: [Vo]:Read posts before replying, PLEASE To all, and some in particular, and some not in particular Please READ people's posts before posting replies. That means the whole damned thing, whether or not you agree with it. If you do not take the time to read the entire thing, either because you are too lazy to do so, or because the content disgusts you, then you do not have the necessary courage or fortitude to make a decent reply. Period. Exclamation point. At sign. Divide by. (you get the point I suppose) Case in point: Jeff Fink was attacked for being supposedly on the side of the oil companies. He specifically stated in more than one post that he is all for getting OFF of the addiction to oil. Stop attacking people when you do not read the entire post. Again, WHY is it that the side which questions Global Warming as caused by technology the polite and thoughful side, yet the majority (not all, some are OK) of the pro-industrial caused Global Warming side is really beginning to paint themselves as hateful scumbags who do not give a damn what happens to the working class people, as long as Owl Gore is A-OK, and his carbon credits too. Inevitably, it seems, any attempt to discuss what is going on scientifically becomes a gaggle of ultra-liberals swooping down to brand everything as partisan or political. Next, the neo-cons emerge from their lairs and counterattack with remarks that make the first group of idiots look right. No science then gets discussed. The working class are still left driving the evil automoblile, and no one says, hey, lets make some real world, nuts and bolts engineering to actually DO something about this, and help the little guy out in the process. Also, why are we bringing religion and religious prophecy into this? This is supposed to be about science, not theology. A couple personal points: To Paul Lowrance: the above is not directed at you. Though I disagree with you on the issue of Global Warming, your posts have been quite polite and civililzed, and I thank you for that. And, regardless of whether or not we agree or disagree on GW, I am right here with you in wanting to see the end of the oil-burning age. Maybe a thread should be begun to discuss real world solar/etc., how we can make it cheap, ideas, experiments on such, etc.? To Dr. Mitchell Swartz: Your post was brief, but very good, in my opinion. I for one am glad you are still on the list. To all of us: Now lets go do some experiments, and find some answers. We here on Vortex are a myriad collection of peoples from across the globe, with many different backgrounds and with our own unique skills. Let us work together, and try to really find the answers. Or to put it more humorously, with due apologies to the great folks who made Animal House: OTTER: In this case, I think we have to go all out. I think this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part! BLUTARSKY: We're just the guys to do it! BOONE: Lets do it. BLUTARSKY: LETS DO IT!!! GO GO GO GO Mayhem and madness ensues --Kyle, hopefully not on double secret probation
Re: [Vo]:Read posts before replying, PLEASE
- Original Message - From: Paul Lowrance [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:39 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Read posts before replying, PLEASE snip a lot...all in fact, read it carefully though I take it then that you nor anyone else really wants to try to do anything about this. Just let the great masters like Al Gore do it all by trading carbon credits, and we will all be okwell, as long as we are not the ones who won't be ok. If that makes any sense. I was very wrong in what I posted last night, I admit. After carefully reading your reply, and which parts in particular you decided not to reply to or discuss, I admit I made a mistake in exempting you from the proverbial point of my spear. I will not make the mistake again of giving credit where it is not due. Now, is there anyone left here who really wants to work on alternatives, and by that I mean, stuff that is cheap and cheerful enough for the little guys to be able to use? And yes I am a big supporter of the little guys. If they don't exist, the menial laborers and such, the upperclass would die off in very short order. Mark my words. Turn out the lights, cut off the parts and supplies long enough, and we all become barbarians again. Regards, --Kyle
