ExFlyer Posted January 21 Report Posted January 21 1 hour ago, Nationalist said: Oh...AI says so, eh? Well...apparently the science community and the investment community, disagree with you and...AI... Yeah sure...prove it LOL Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Michael Hardner Posted January 21 Report Posted January 21 3 hours ago, Nationalist said: 1. Gore started the climate religion based on pure lies... 2. And that happens to be common knowledge now. 1. Climate Change isn't a lie. It's real - see the link in my signature. 2. https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2093 Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Moonbox Posted January 21 Report Posted January 21 4 hours ago, Goddess said: In fact, a lot of them out-right refuse to read anything that is not their preferred narrative. Isn't this just a self-affirming fallacy though? Why is it hard for you to understand why someone wouldn't give anonymous facebook posts or youtube and AI-generated clickbait any credence? When you can't even put your name and your face to what you're saying, why should anyone believe what you have to say? We only have so much time in our lives and only so much bandwidth for information. I don't think it's unreasonable to save that for people willing to put their name on what they're saying, especially in an age where generative AI can barf out videos and articles saying anything you want them to with near-zero effort. 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Nationalist Posted January 21 Author Report Posted January 21 58 minutes ago, Moonbox said: I mean, that's what the video you posted is. It's AI-generated slop with a fake talking head, but now you have a problem with AI???? 😆 Regardless, if what you were saying was true, then at ~$20M per kg and a total annual production of around 18kg/y, then surely you'd be able to point to some "deposits" that are being developed for mining? Seems like a no-brainer, doesn't it??? The only terrestrial sources (this is from the article you posted earlier btw) are from tritium decay (nuclear byproduct) and separating helium from natural gas at near-absolute zero temperatures, which your own article says could only produce mere kilograms per year. Beyond that, your own article lists lunar mining and nuclear fusion as the only viable sources. There are only a few people on this forum who botch citation as badly as you, but well done. You being one? As I showed, the deposits found are preserved, ample and now accessible. Im still trying to figure out why you're so opposed to this. One of the articles I posted does mention lunar mining, but that link also shows that extraction and processing is possible. Which you knew...unless you have poor reading comprehension. But nice attempt at cherry picking. I have to ask, what possible motive could you have for trying to oppose new green power generation? Is it not...Libbie Approved or something? 31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. Climate Change isn't a lie. It's real - see the link in my signature. 2. https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2093 I didn't say it wasn't. Please stop moving the goal posts. 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Goddess Posted January 21 Report Posted January 21 21 minutes ago, Moonbox said: Why is it hard for you to understand why someone wouldn't give anonymous facebook posts or youtube and AI-generated clickbait any credence? Ya, you keep accusing me of that, even though I have an 82-page thread on one topic with none of those things. Hundreds of peer-reviewed medical studies. I notice when someone posts something from social media, if it agrees with your preferred narrative, you have no problem with it then. 1 Quote "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
Michael Hardner Posted January 21 Report Posted January 21 2 hours ago, Nationalist said: I didn't say it wasn't. Please stop moving the goal posts. Human-caused Climate Change, what you seem to call a religion. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Nationalist Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Human-caused Climate Change, what you seem to call a religion. No Mike. You're moving the goal posts again. How many times have I said that I believe man's industrialization has been a cause of global climate change? But that's not the issue here, is it. Its well established now that although we've had a marginal effect, we are in no danger of any sort of crisis. On the other hand...and more to the point of this subject...why would you...or any climate religious...find it necessary to dispute the potential presented by this Helium 3 discovery? That makes no sense, unless you greenies have an alterior motive? 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Nationalist Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 5 minutes ago, Nationalist said: No Mike. You're moving the goal posts again. How many times have I said that I believe man's industrialization has been a cause of global climate change? But that's not the issue here, is it. Its well established now that although we've had a marginal effect, we are in no danger of any sort of crisis. On the other hand...and more to the point of this subject...why would you...or any climate religious...find it necessary to dispute the potential presented by this Helium 3 discovery? That makes no sense, unless you greenies have an alterior motive? @ExFlyer...Yes I do understand you're confused. Or more accurately put...cornered by your own stupidity. But giving you the benefit of the doubt, why dont you answer my question? Why would you be opposed to mining this Helium 3 to further green energy potential? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
ExFlyer Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 55 minutes ago, Nationalist said: @ExFlyer...Yes I do understand you're confused. Or more accurately put...cornered by your own stupidity. But giving you the benefit of the doubt, why dont you answer my question? Why would you be opposed to mining this Helium 3 to further green energy potential? Actually, what confuses me is why you, for some reason, believe H3 is potentially an energy or green energy potential. And in particular when you say there is investment in its mining in Alberta and Saskatchewan. I do not know what question you posed. You seem to think there is huge investment in producing it when that is not true. " Helium-3 ( He3cap H e cubed 𝐻𝑒3 ) is not currently being mined in an operational capacity, but it is the target of active, serious development for future lunar harvesting" "Currently, the only source of Helium-3 on Earth is the decay of tritium from decommissioned nuclear weapons, which is in very short supply" " He3cap H e cubed 𝐻𝑒3. is not actively "mined" on Earth in the traditional sense of extracting it from natural geological deposits. Because it is extremely rare on Earth, it is instead produced as a byproduct of nuclear activities" I am sure by all the evidence folks have given you that it is a potential for fusion...when that even becomes feasible. I give you a lot of credit at time but with the H3 bandwagon you seem to have locked on something that is not happening. Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Legato Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 Don't know enough about the subject but there are people who are exploring the viability of Earth based resources. Pulsar Helium Inc. (AIM/TSXV: PLSR, OTCQB: PSRHF) is advancing what could prove to be the world’s first viable terrestrial source of helium-3. At its Topaz Project in Minnesota, USA, laboratory analysis has confirmed the presence of helium-3 at concentrations that are broadly equivalent to those on the moon. The helium-3 at Topaz is hosted within gas and would be produced via surface gas processing, distinguishing it fundamentally from solid-material mining concepts being considered for the moon. Crucially, this discovery is being advanced within a stable jurisdiction, an increasingly important consideration as governments recognize helium-3 as a strategically significant resource. https://www.share-talk.com/helium-3-scarcity-strategy-and-the-case-for-a-terrestrial-first/ 1 1 Quote
ExFlyer Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Legato said: Don't know enough about the subject but there are people who are exploring the viability of Earth based resources. Pulsar Helium Inc. (AIM/TSXV: PLSR, OTCQB: PSRHF) is advancing what could prove to be the world’s first viable terrestrial source of helium-3. At its Topaz Project in Minnesota, USA, laboratory analysis has confirmed the presence of helium-3 at concentrations that are broadly equivalent to those on the moon. The helium-3 at Topaz is hosted within gas and would be produced via surface gas processing, distinguishing it fundamentally from solid-material mining concepts being considered for the moon. Crucially, this discovery is being advanced within a stable jurisdiction, an increasingly important consideration as governments recognize helium-3 as a strategically significant resource. https://www.share-talk.com/helium-3-scarcity-strategy-and-the-case-for-a-terrestrial-first/ I am sure there is exploring and there should be. My point was that one poster was making it out as if there was major activity and that is not correct. Oh and that fusion is green energy when " nuclear fusion can be considered a potential "green" or clean energy source because it produces no greenhouse gases, uses abundant fuel (hydrogen, lithium), creates minimal long-lived radioactive waste compared to fission, and is inherently safe. While it's a promising addition to future clean energy mixes alongside renewables, it faces significant technical hurdles, so it's not an immediate solution for current climate goals" Edited January 22 by ExFlyer Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Nationalist Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 20 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: I am sure there is exploring and there should be. My point was that one poster was making it out as if there was major activity and that is not correct. Oh and that fusion is green energy when " nuclear fusion can be considered a potential "green" or clean energy source because it produces no greenhouse gases, uses abundant fuel (hydrogen, lithium), creates minimal long-lived radioactive waste compared to fission, and is inherently safe. While it's a promising addition to future clean energy mixes alongside renewables, it faces significant technical hurdles, so it's not an immediate solution for current climate goals" No I wasnt. Must you lie in every post? I simply posted that the potential is there for terrestrial Helium 3 mining for green energy and you farts denied that. I wanna know why you greenies are so opposed to this? 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Moonbox Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 18 hours ago, Nationalist said: You being one? As I showed, the deposits found are preserved, ample and now accessible. Im still trying to figure out why you're so opposed to this. No, you haven't shown anything of the sort. I read your links and they don't say what you pretend they do. I specifically outlined what they actually say and how they disprove what you're saying, but you don't seem to be interested in engaging in any sort of substantive discussion. I'm a die-hard fusion energy cheerleader and have been following it regularly for at least a decade. With that comes at least a basic general-level of knowledge on the topic and the challenges that researchers and engineers currently face. There's a reason that current fusion power prototypes use Deuterium-Tritium fuel mixes rather than He-3, despite the fact that the latter is a theoretically superior fuel. 30 seconds of Google research can answer why and save you a lot of trouble and embarrassment, but you obviously prefer to dig your heels in and defend an obviously ridiculous position. 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Moonbox Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 19 hours ago, Goddess said: Ya, you keep accusing me of that, even though I have an 82-page thread on one topic with none of those things. Hundreds of peer-reviewed medical studies. I keep saying that because you keep doing it. You're defending an AI-generated talking head in this thread, and you recently referenced an anonymous facebook post for your claims about Michael Ma's floor crossing being tied to supposed meetings with Chinese agents. These are just the most recent ones, and they're kind of ridiculous. 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
ExFlyer Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 29 minutes ago, Nationalist said: No I wasnt. Must you lie in every post? I simply posted that the potential is there for terrestrial Helium 3 mining for green energy and you farts denied that. I wanna know why you greenies are so opposed to this? HA HA HA If there ain't any yet and fusion is still imagination...then yes, you lie LOL LOL LOL Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Goddess Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 7 minutes ago, Moonbox said: I keep saying that because you keep doing it. You're defending an AI-generated talking head in this thread, and you recently referenced an anonymous facebook post for your claims about Michael Ma's floor crossing being tied to supposed meetings with Chinese agents. These are just the most recent ones, and they're kind of ridiculous. Those are not the main sources of my info. You have also referenced such things in many of your posts. Everybody here has from time to time. The problem is that you have no problem with such sources if they agree with your preferred narrative. I've seen you "Like" and "Thank You" vote such posts many times. So don't make out like I'm some anomaly here and that you are somehow above such things. Quote "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
Nationalist Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 1 hour ago, Moonbox said: No, you haven't shown anything of the sort. I read your links and they don't say what you pretend they do. I specifically outlined what they actually say and how they disprove what you're saying, but you don't seem to be interested in engaging in any sort of substantive discussion. I'm a die-hard fusion energy cheerleader and have been following it regularly for at least a decade. With that comes at least a basic general-level of knowledge on the topic and the challenges that researchers and engineers currently face. There's a reason that current fusion power prototypes use Deuterium-Tritium fuel mixes rather than He-3, despite the fact that the latter is a theoretically superior fuel. 30 seconds of Google research can answer why and save you a lot of trouble and embarrassment, but you obviously prefer to dig your heels in and defend an obviously ridiculous position. What im saying is this is good news and im wondering why you are intent on making it all out to be stupid? 1. H-3 is a better fuel in general. 2. The potential for H-3 fueled becomes more reasonable. If you're such a cheerleader, how is it you oppose such new potential? This position of yours is irrational. Do you not think the H-3 mined will be useful? Or that they will never mine it? What is it? Could it be...that should this process and isotope prove invaluable, you'd have to admit the folly of all the greenie devastation? That it was all a panicked devastation of the global economy? Perhaps? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Nationalist Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 (edited) 3 hours ago, ExFlyer said: HA HA HA If there ain't any yet and fusion is still imagination...then yes, you lie LOL LOL LOL Still imagination eh? https://thedebrief.org/how-soon-will-we-see-nuclear-fusion-new-indicators-suggest-it-may-be-sooner-than-we-think/ Silly boy... So tell me...why do you...a greenie...oppose fusion? Edited January 22 by Nationalist 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Moonbox Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 41 minutes ago, Goddess said: Those are not the main sources of my info. You have also referenced such things in many of your posts. Everybody here has from time to time. No, I have never referenced these things, especially not Facebook which nobody under 50 uses for anything but group messaging and local marketplace in the first place. 41 minutes ago, Goddess said: The problem is that you have no problem with such sources if they agree with your preferred narrative. I've seen you "Like" and "Thank You" vote such posts many times. No you haven't. You're just making that up and projecting. At best, an anonymous social media post is worthless. Next time you see me upvoting some goon trying to get away with this, call me out and ridicule me because I'd deserve it. Most people know better in the same way they know better than to trust masked strangers with watching their kids. You have absolutely zero reason to trust them, and plenty of warnings signs why you shouldn't. 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
ExFlyer Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 36 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Still imagination eh? https://thedebrief.org/how-soon-will-we-see-nuclear-fusion-new-indicators-suggest-it-may-be-sooner-than-we-think/ Silly boy... So tell me...why do you...a greenie...oppose fusion? Yup....your imagination LOL I am sure you did not read that bit of fantasy. I did LOL Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Goddess Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 14 minutes ago, Moonbox said: Next time you see me upvoting some goon trying to get away with this, call me out and ridicule me because I'd deserve it. I don't follow you around the board, but next time I see you do it, I will. 14 minutes ago, Moonbox said: You have absolutely zero reason to trust them, and plenty of warnings signs why you shouldn't. I am actually agreeing with you. I rarely post anything from social media. I post direct links to news articles and medical studies. I follow MSM, but I don't have my head up their a$$ like you do. I seek out all sides of the story. 1 Quote "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
Nationalist Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 11 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: Yup....your imagination LOL I am sure you did not read that bit of fantasy. I did LOL Fantasy. Hilarious. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
ExFlyer Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Fantasy. Hilarious. Absolutely, your fantasy is hilarious. But hey, we all need dreamers LOL. Having difficulty with reality is always problematic for dreamers, especially when it smack them in the face Have a good day regardless Bye. Edited January 22 by ExFlyer 1 Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Moonbox Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 2 hours ago, Nationalist said: This position of yours is irrational. Do you not think the H-3 mined will be useful? Or that they will never mine it? What is it? Could it be...that should this process and isotope prove invaluable, you'd have to admit the folly of all the greenie devastation? That it was all a panicked devastation of the global economy? Perhaps? All I'm pointing out is that the video you posted was useless AI-slop, and that we're not sitting on mineable deposits as you proposed. It would be great if it were true, but it isn't. Pretending that I'm "against" a resource that sells for $20M a kg or that I think it's useless is about as ridiculous as saying I'm "against" curing cancer because I don't believe eating moose meat gets rid of tumors. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Moonbox Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 1 hour ago, Goddess said: I am actually agreeing with you. I rarely post anything from social media. I post direct links to news articles and medical studies. Okay well then why are you critiquing me in this thread for dismissing AI-generated junk content? I don't know why you keep bringing up medical studies in this thread either. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.