US Physics Prof: Global Warming is the Greatest & Most Successful Pseudoscientific Fraud I Have Seen in My Long Life

Sort of what you've been doing with Al Gore all along isn't it?

Well, the way I see it, oil dependence is killing the US economy. It is causing the death of US military personell. It is destroying our air, our waters, our land and our wildlife. Every time you buy gasoline you are sending money to governments that support and protect Islamic extremists who only want to kill Americans---and at the very least contributes to the trade deficit that is destroying the value of the US dollar, making everything we have to buy more expensive with each passing day.

YOU want to keep the US dependent on foreign oil because you have a politically motivated hatred for Al Gore. And you are scared to death that things will change.

Well, big news, things are going to change. If people listen to you, things are changing now---and they are going to continue to change----FOR THE WORSE.

If people listen to Al Gore, and we get off of our dependence on foreign oil, and coal that is destroying our air, our water and our land----things will change for the better.

What you are telling me when you launch into your tirades is that you really don't care about the safety, security or economic well being of the American people. You don't care about the incredible waste of the lives, health and bravery of the military service men and women who protect us. You don't care that America the beautiful is being turned into America the destroyed and polluted wasteland.

According to an article titled "Warfare Goes Green" in the current issue of Discover Magazine, one of the leaders of my team, Marine Corps Major General Richard Zilmer sent an urgent request from the field in Iraq that he needed "a renewable and self-sustainable energy solution" for forward operating bases and combat outposts to reduce the need for fuel bearing convoys, which draw troop strength away from their core mission.

Another team leader of my team, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, says that the US Navy will be deploying completely fossil fuel free Carrier Strike Force fleets to sea using nuclear powered, electric hybrid, and biofuel ships and planes within 6 years.

Another team leader of my team, Air Force energy director Dave King, says that the Air Force will be running 50/50 petroleum/biofuel blend to meet their fuel needs within 5 years. Air Force fuel needs account for one half of DoD petroleum purchases. US DoD is the largest single user of petroleum in the world.

Both the Army and the Air Force are installing large scale RE energy projects. The future forecasts call for increasing energy costs especially in the fossil fuel market. Savings from replacement of fossil fuel needs will be used to finance equipment purchases in view of expected cuts budget requests.

The EPA yesterday approved the use of 15% ethanol to replace the 10% limit in RFG---and says it expects to expand the ethanol limits on RFG covering usage by more vehicles by the end of the year.

If biofuels are good enough to an F-16 or F-18----they should do just fine in your Silverado.

-------" This is just some feel good PR so the hippies don't get their anti-war on for the midterm elections"-------

Your completely myoptic, closed minded, jingoistic views of the world around you are truly breath taking. It is amazing that you are even able to function at all in the real world. There are several veterans organizations that place a high priority on ending the US dependence on foreign oil.

BTW----the hippies have been gone for about 35 to 40 years now. It is time you stopped living in the past. If you want to engage in name calling and labeling---you should at least use names and labels that are relevant.

I lived in Latvia before I moved back to the US. I was looking through the European Economic Union website not long ago. I noticed that even little bitty Latvia, about the size and population of West Virginia---and not wealthy by any stretch gets 32% of their energy from renewable resources. More than 3X as much as the US even counting hydroelectric. They expect to make that at least 40% by 2020. If little bitty Latvia can do it, why can't the US do it?

Because the US is too stupid, lazy and egotistical to get off of their lazy, pampered butts and do it.

--------" You do understand that tiny little nations with tiny populations in a tiny amount of space can do things that a big nation spread out over a huge amount of space cannot do. Dont you?"--------

Yes, I do understand. A tiny little nation with a tiny population that is intelligent, hard working and willing to make a commitment to do the right thing for everyone can accomplish more than three times as much as the richest, most powerful nation on earth,

I guess the most powerful nation on earth is not so powerful as it likes to think it is.

Well, if the US is that bad----what are you doing still hanging around here? Maybe you need to find somewhere else to hang your hat.

I trained handlers for military and police K9 work in Europe.

The money is good, and it is very rewarding work.

I have to warn you though, it is much easier training the dogs than it is the handlers. Dogs are much smarter than people. Dogs just do what works, and dogs do not keep making the same mistakes over and over again unlike people.

I've also found that when I treat the dogs right, they treat me right.

Here's the long and short of all this. Of all these posts on all these subjects---the only thing I've EVER advocated is that we get rid of our use of oil and coal. The use of oil and coal is destroying our country, our economy, our health, and our security. The only thing I've ever advocated about people is that we treat other people the way that we want to be treated ourselves. You want low taxes. OK, so do I. Here's a little secret for you-----the best way to lower taxes is to not fight wars.

What does it matter to you what fuel you put in your truck when you go out to start it up? You just want it to start up and go where you want to at a reasonable cost. We can do that with biofuels and natural gas. And at less cost than oil. And we don't have to fight anyone or have environmental damage to do that. If we all do that, it does not matter what Al Gore or anyone else says.

I think if we treat the earth right and treat other people right, the earth and other people will treat us right. Someday, there will be bad people and we will have to fight a war again I think. When that happens, it will be much better for us if we have prepared well ahead of time by treating people right when they are having bad times. If we do, then WE will have friends willing to help us when bad times come to our door.

When bad times hit, you can never have too many friends.

----" Biofuels do not cost less per mile traveled than oil. They cost more. Significantly more"---------

You are wrong. Methane (natural gas) costs less than petroleum by a long shot. This has always been the case. In 1990 the governor of Louisiana had the director of natural resources do a study comparing the cost of driving state vehicles on petroleum vs.the cost of using natural gas. Louisiana produces both so there was no conflict of interest. The study found that even with the cost of vehicle conversion and compressors------on high mileage fleet vehicles it cost less to use natural gas than petroleum. In 1990 the cost of gasoline was $.73/gal. The cost of natural gas today is roughly the same as it was in 1990. Try buying gasoline for $.73 a gallon today.

Methane is both a fossil fuel(with greater energy reserves than coal) AND a biofuel. We can make it out of any kind of organic matter---even sewage and landfills.

Ethanol gets less mileage than gasoline, but it is cheaper than gasoline. It costs about the same to use E85 as it does to use gasoline.

In order to make diesel fuel from petroleum, it needs to be refined. Distilled. Biodiesel does not. It is put through a process called transesterification. The "leftovers" are valuable products in themselves and can be reused. Primarily glycerin, a basic industrial ingredient that is used in everything from lipstick to dynamite. Glycerin sells for about 10X the amount per gallon that the fuel does.

Still with the "hippie" thing? You need to wake up. We are well into the 21st Century now. "Hippies" were 20th Century. You need to catch up with the rest of the world. You have been left in the dust.

------" Do you know what kind of MPG numbers methane has? They suck worse than ethanol."------

Methane is a gas. It is not measured in gallons. It is measured in cubic feet or meters.

As for ethanol, that does not seem to bother the people who build and race the fastest and most advanced race cars in the world, the Indy League Racing Circuit. They build cars that can go over 260 miles per hour with 3L engines that develop between 1200 and 1600 bhp. As much hp as 4, 18 wheel diesel OTR trucks. And they use only 100% ethanol for fuel.

If ethanol can drive a racer through the toughest race in the world at 260 mph----it can drive you four door grocery getter just fine.

What is on the race track today is on the road tomorrow.

Survival of the fittest.

Or, you could get a mule and a wagon. That would run on biofuel too.

When the Model T Ford was introduced in 1908 it could be ordered with a Holley carburetor that could be switched for use between gasoline or ethanol. Henry Ford figured(correctly) that many farmers would make their own fuel.

In the referenced article, " Engine and means of starting
Main article: Ford Model T engine"

4th paragraph, first sentence.

-----" Besdies, the engine made about 20 HP. On ethanol that would be at best 10. The car would barely move itself at that point."-------

The power and efficiency of a gasoline engine depends on the compression ratio. Since compression ratio did not change, there was no difference in hp between the engine when running on gasoline and ethanol. There was however a huge difference in fuel availability. The first gasoline station was not established until 1913 in Seattle WA. Ethanol could be purchased in bulk at any pharmacy however.

As for barely moving----my grandfather had a Model T. He and my grandmother made a trip every year from St. Louis MO to Napa CA in their model T on the Lincoln Highway to visit her mother. From 1919 to about 1930 they made the trip every year---on the Lincoln Highway, which was the first transcontinental road. The Lincoln Highway was not paved completely until the WPA projects of the late 30s. They made the 2500 mile trip in about two weeks. Less than 10% of the Lincoln Highway was paved when it opened, it was mostly McAdam(gravel), and in many places barely more than track through the fields or sand. Before she died, I took my mother on a trip to the West to visit Napa again, and we retraced her route as a child in the back of the Model T. The Lincoln Highway is still there, US 36. We retraced her route and stop overs along the way when possible. Many of the original road beds can still be found. And they are not easily negotiated even with a modern 4X4 vehicle.

As for what can and can't be done, you are a poor example to lecture me. My family did it, not just once but on a routine on going yearly basis. And my mother said that she was enthralled by HER grandmother's stories of how much easier the crossing was now that automobiles were available and the land mostly settled with towns, some of which were as close as 200 miles apart. SHE originally made the trip in a mule drawn covered wagon.

Not all people are as wimpy and whinny as you are. Some people just go out and do it, with what they have.

Yes, ethanol contains fewer BTU per gallon than gasoline. So what? It is still a more efficient fuel.

The reason that flex fuel vehicles get less mileage than gasoline is that compression ratio has to be kept low in the 9 or 10 to 1 range to accommodate the use of gasoline. If you were to tune the engine to maximize E85 use, you could easily go to 16 or 18 to 1 ratio--and improve mileage about 30-40% minimum. The problem is gasoline with its octane rating of 85-87---ethanol's octane rating is 115. Using ethanol, you can more than double the thermal efficiency of an internal combustion engine. An engine that is set up to maximize ethanol use will go farther on a gallon of fuel than one using gasoline---even though the gasoline has a higher BTU rating. More of the stored energy in the ethanol goes into doing the actual work of moving the vehicle.

BTW---compression ratio can also be easily changed by the use of a turbo compressor with a dump valve. By adjusting the dump valve, you can set compression where ever you want it.

When using a carburetor air/fuel mix is adjust by the use of a restrictor --- usually a metal plate with variable size opening that changes the air/fuel mix. Larger opening for gasoline that requires more air, smaller opening for ethanol that requires less air. Just flip a switch to change from one setting to the other.

BTW--------" They also spread the lie from "The Emperor Has No Clothes" that Ford made an all hemp Model T"--------

It wasn't a Model T---it was a Model A. It was produced for the War Production Board in 1943 as an experiment to be able to divert needed metal to war production.

----" While you are technicaly correct about the mechanical alterations to make ethanol a practical fuel source they are not something that the average car owner can do.'-------

The average car owner does not have to. All they have to do is buy a flex fuel vehicle. They cost no more than a conventional gasoline only powered model. And there is complete flexibility to use either gasoline or E85, whatever is available. The engine sensors automatically detect the alcohol content of the fuel and set the injectors to the proper fuel/air mixture. Flex fuel vehicles have been available on the market over twenty years.

There are even cars available that can use pure gasoline, gasoline and ethanol mixtures, pure hydrous ethanol(straight from the still, unblended) and/or compressed natural gas(methane). They even have an onboard computer that automatically switches from one fuel to another to meet road conditions and fuel cost---it preferentially uses the fuel that costs the least to buy. All the driver does is key in the cost when he buys fuel.

If all cars sold in the US were required to be flex fuel, it would not cost any more to buy a car than it does now----and consumers would have complete freedom to choose whatever they want to use for fuel. Eventually, almost all cars on the road will be able run on mix of different fuels by simple attrition. Older cars will be taken off the road and newer cars will come on the road.

---------" If we were to convert the surface fleet to ethanol it would raise the price of corn per bushel, which farmers wouldn't mind, but all that land that is kept fallow for wildlife would wind up plowed under to grow more corn."------

Almost 3 times as much of our current corn crop goes to produce high fructose corn syrup now. The main ingredient in soda pop and cookies, cakes and other sweets. Sugar is a direct substitute. Sugar beets can produce much more sugar per acre than corn. Even if we produce 6 times the amount of ethanol that we now do from corn, the amount of land needed to produce the same amount of food we have now will likely drop. Or, we can produce ethanol directly from the sugar in sugar beets. With sugar cane, we can produce 8 to 10 times the amount of ethanol per acre that we do with corn----and sugar cane grows well in most states of the South, Southwest and Hawaii, as well as Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands and Samoa.

-------" Model T, Model A, whatever. He never did it."-------

Yes, it was done. Hemp as a binding material never caught on---but there was another binder that did catch on. That is why you have fiberglass today. Hemp is gaining renewed interest as a binder material today because of its far lower energy cost to produce and biodegradability----not major concerns in 1943. They were far more concerned about keeping hemp illegal.

Again with the "hippies"? Try rowing with both oars.

OK, he is resigning from the APS because no one in the APS will listen to his climate fraud conspiracy theory.

Apparently they all think he is a senile old curmudgeon.

This is a free country, he can say or do anything he wants to. That's ok with me.

I don't think we need to wait ten years. I am seeing signs that it is already happening almost everywhere I look.