Embargoes, Super Injunctions, Black Outs, Conspiracies, Denials and Cover Ups
That's the media for you.
Having heard many theories and read many stories, (many of which I suspect were well and truly covered up), I have recently found myself back in the saddle of my favourite old nag, 'Donkey Detective'. He's well-aged now, having been round so many tracks and forever trailing on the heels of his old friends, 'Bog Off', 'Get Lost' and 'Toonoseyforyourowngood'.
I retired him several times, but kept going back to the yard and dragging him out for one last chance to bring home a Classic. This year, he has gone back into training, hacking out now and again in the company of my good friend, 'Professor Lee Malone'. Since the BBB's thermacell incident, I'd laid the energy 'thing' to rest.
Until recently.
It's a curious topic in which to become involved, mainly because on one side I have scientists who won't agree that cold fusion is possible and on the other I have low energy nuclear reactions that are still enough to send shivers down the spines of all the CND-types I have met over the years.
No scientist or professor of anything I know will lay their neck on the line and confirm the reality of cold fusion, so this is a difficult topic to discuss without one or other party looking at me as if I'm a raving lunatic.
But let's face it - how sane is any one of us?
We already have nuclear power stations, nuclear weapons, cloning laboratories, shuttles jetting off into space, chemicals and drugs for everything, so how much more precarious could life be if someone could categorically prove that a low energy nuclear reaction can be achieved and controlled in the name of producing some steam for domestic hot water or cheap energy?
So what if cold fusion cannot (yet) be scientifically proven? When I attended school, carbon equated to diamond and graphite - there was no scientific record of Buckminster fullerine, or 'bucky balls', and we'd probably have been expelled for daring to insist such a thing existed, let alone suggesting it might be useful in cancer research!
A few years back, after what may have been seen as being 'warned off' investigations into such topics as the disappearance of Shergar, the spread of FMD, fluoridation of drinking water, tracking devices, ME, Gulf War Syndrome, CFS, phone tapping and a number of cloning research projects, I began trying to follow a safer route, that of the current research into what could be the development of potentially cheap energy. (No, I don't run my car on domestic cooking oil or recycled household waste, nor does 'Donkey Detective' get harnassed to a cart!)
I was convinced that hydrogen fuel cells would be fully developed and brought into mainstream productivity long before now, [Interesting news article relating to fuel cells here] despite my aversion to Hydrogen. I blame the schooling system of the time - my brain autiomatically links Hydrogen to bombs and the Hindenburg disaster.
Once again, conspiracy theories abound in relation to such delicate subjects, primarily, I suspect, because any threat to, or perceived collapse of, the global oil industry could signify the beginnings of collapse of the capitalist society in which many of us live.
Power could be lost, money could be lost, control could be lost. They cannot afford for that to happen.
Now, however, our global economy, which would appear to have been built on a bedrock of precious metals, oil and the petrochemical industries, looks to be teetering on the brink of collapse without the introduction of mass produced, readily available, cheap and clean energy, so why bother to keep quiet about it any longer?
They denied the existenc of 'Black Ops' like the Stealth Bomber and still deny the existence of 'Project Aurora', but denial of facts does not mean they are any less factual. Always best to keep that in mind. Likewise, the absense of denial need not equate to an admission of fact, or guilt.
Hydrogen fuel cell technology, nuclear, tidal, solar, hydro, wind power, biomass, green energy, the resurgence of 'electric' vehicles... they all point to one thing in common; people need power, in all its guises!
Some people want more than others and are prepared to do whatever it takes to keep hold of the reins of progress, or thwart that of others. These are the people who make it increasingly difficult for you and me, the ordinary citizens of this planet, to afford what we need, when we need it.
Cheap energy - how much would a bountiful supply of that aid you in your everyday lifestyle? How much more could you achieve if you weren't worried about how to heat your home or warm your water? What if an easily adapted element of water could be made to fuel your cars? What would that save?
You don't need to be a nuclear physicist (or rocket scientist) to realise that a single step of progress towards solving the fossil fuels 'crisis', 'global warming', 'acid rain' or the 'greenhouse effect' has to be good.
Anything that could help cast off the scurge of fuel poverty has to be good.
Anything that could help manufacturers afford to keep on manufacturing and employing a workforce to do so, rather than paying off staff to add to the unemployment problem, has to be good!
Hasn't it?
But that may not be so!
Feel free to comment here or you can join us in the new Paranoid Times forum to discuss this or any other relevant topic.
ParanoidTimes
www.scottishmultimedia.co.uk
That's the media for you.
Having heard many theories and read many stories, (many of which I suspect were well and truly covered up), I have recently found myself back in the saddle of my favourite old nag, 'Donkey Detective'. He's well-aged now, having been round so many tracks and forever trailing on the heels of his old friends, 'Bog Off', 'Get Lost' and 'Toonoseyforyourowngood'.
I retired him several times, but kept going back to the yard and dragging him out for one last chance to bring home a Classic. This year, he has gone back into training, hacking out now and again in the company of my good friend, 'Professor Lee Malone'. Since the BBB's thermacell incident, I'd laid the energy 'thing' to rest.
Until recently.
It's a curious topic in which to become involved, mainly because on one side I have scientists who won't agree that cold fusion is possible and on the other I have low energy nuclear reactions that are still enough to send shivers down the spines of all the CND-types I have met over the years.
No scientist or professor of anything I know will lay their neck on the line and confirm the reality of cold fusion, so this is a difficult topic to discuss without one or other party looking at me as if I'm a raving lunatic.
But let's face it - how sane is any one of us?
We already have nuclear power stations, nuclear weapons, cloning laboratories, shuttles jetting off into space, chemicals and drugs for everything, so how much more precarious could life be if someone could categorically prove that a low energy nuclear reaction can be achieved and controlled in the name of producing some steam for domestic hot water or cheap energy?
So what if cold fusion cannot (yet) be scientifically proven? When I attended school, carbon equated to diamond and graphite - there was no scientific record of Buckminster fullerine, or 'bucky balls', and we'd probably have been expelled for daring to insist such a thing existed, let alone suggesting it might be useful in cancer research!
A few years back, after what may have been seen as being 'warned off' investigations into such topics as the disappearance of Shergar, the spread of FMD, fluoridation of drinking water, tracking devices, ME, Gulf War Syndrome, CFS, phone tapping and a number of cloning research projects, I began trying to follow a safer route, that of the current research into what could be the development of potentially cheap energy. (No, I don't run my car on domestic cooking oil or recycled household waste, nor does 'Donkey Detective' get harnassed to a cart!)
I was convinced that hydrogen fuel cells would be fully developed and brought into mainstream productivity long before now, [Interesting news article relating to fuel cells here] despite my aversion to Hydrogen. I blame the schooling system of the time - my brain autiomatically links Hydrogen to bombs and the Hindenburg disaster.
Once again, conspiracy theories abound in relation to such delicate subjects, primarily, I suspect, because any threat to, or perceived collapse of, the global oil industry could signify the beginnings of collapse of the capitalist society in which many of us live.
Power could be lost, money could be lost, control could be lost. They cannot afford for that to happen.
Now, however, our global economy, which would appear to have been built on a bedrock of precious metals, oil and the petrochemical industries, looks to be teetering on the brink of collapse without the introduction of mass produced, readily available, cheap and clean energy, so why bother to keep quiet about it any longer?
They denied the existenc of 'Black Ops' like the Stealth Bomber and still deny the existence of 'Project Aurora', but denial of facts does not mean they are any less factual. Always best to keep that in mind. Likewise, the absense of denial need not equate to an admission of fact, or guilt.
Hydrogen fuel cell technology, nuclear, tidal, solar, hydro, wind power, biomass, green energy, the resurgence of 'electric' vehicles... they all point to one thing in common; people need power, in all its guises!
Some people want more than others and are prepared to do whatever it takes to keep hold of the reins of progress, or thwart that of others. These are the people who make it increasingly difficult for you and me, the ordinary citizens of this planet, to afford what we need, when we need it.
Cheap energy - how much would a bountiful supply of that aid you in your everyday lifestyle? How much more could you achieve if you weren't worried about how to heat your home or warm your water? What if an easily adapted element of water could be made to fuel your cars? What would that save?
You don't need to be a nuclear physicist (or rocket scientist) to realise that a single step of progress towards solving the fossil fuels 'crisis', 'global warming', 'acid rain' or the 'greenhouse effect' has to be good.
Anything that could help cast off the scurge of fuel poverty has to be good.
Anything that could help manufacturers afford to keep on manufacturing and employing a workforce to do so, rather than paying off staff to add to the unemployment problem, has to be good!
Hasn't it?
But that may not be so!
Feel free to comment here or you can join us in the new Paranoid Times forum to discuss this or any other relevant topic.
ParanoidTimes
www.scottishmultimedia.co.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment