Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Psychology Today

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Comments
14,581 - 14,600 of 21,530 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15389 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
What irritates me about nuclear programs in the US, is all the waste-- if they would simply re-process the "spent" fuel rods next to working nuclear piles, it could be reused several times, before all the useful isotopes are gone.
By the time it decays into lighter elements, there is not all that much leftover for deep-crust burial.
The majority of "waste" is really low-level stuff anyway (like tools, clothing, protective gear, etc). That could be handled in a very different way than at present, where it's treated as if it were made of "super kooties" or something-- if it were incinerated, and the exhaust carefully collected, you'd have 1/100th of the mass/volume or better--sure, it'd be higher level radiation, but much-much smaller to dispose of. Cheaper, too.
The whole thing is fraught with arbitrary silliness, and hampered by morons who are afraid of their shadows-- if the "nuclear" word is attached? They are against it--even if it was "nuclear medicine".
Idiots.
A properly engineered and properly >>maintained<< reactor NOT located on a fault line or in a hurricane zone is safer than houses-- certainly MUCH safer than damns are.
The key is oversight-- NOT from the company profiting from the endeavor, but by an interested, but unbiased 3rd party.
Typically this would be government-- but alas, our government is too easy to corrupt these days.
For proof? The ReThuglican Party-- who allowed itself to be bought off by gun manufacturers, instead of enacting REASONABLE protections for the citizenry.
... ugg.
Nuclear power has an image problem and Fukushima certainly didn't help that at all.

It's like we're still stuck in the 1970's nuclear power plant designs based on 1960's technology.

It'd be like trying to run the Internet on Apollo spacecraft computers.

I find it difficult to believe that nuclear physicists haven't come up with a better power plant.(well, I have seen some but didn't really delve into it too much. Not a particular interest to go into the details.)

Or that we can't have the resolve to place those power plants in safer areas other than near earthquake zones or near the ocean.

That idea of eminent domain was to utilize certain land areas suitable for the common good. Examples: we build dams for power and flood the private properties behind those dams. Railroads were built with that idea because trains aren't exactly known for their cornering ability.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15390 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I like where you are going-- except for the "run on water" bit.
That is pure BS-- sorry about that, but water simply has no useful energy to release, to run your car.
Unless you have invented an anti-matter converter? One that converts the mass of the water directly into energy? No?
Then "cars running on water" is not possible.
Yeah, I've seen the "run on water" snake oil medicine.

It's been a long time since Chemistry classes, but I seem to recall that breaking down the H2O compound takes a lot of energy. Pretty much you need something like solar or nuclear to make it commercially feasible.

But at that point, you'd better off desalinating ocean water for fresh water.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15391 May 6, 2013
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, I've seen the "run on water" snake oil medicine.
It's been a long time since Chemistry classes, but I seem to recall that breaking down the H2O compound takes a lot of energy. Pretty much you need something like solar or nuclear to make it commercially feasible.
But at that point, you'd better off desalinating ocean water for fresh water.
Yes-- water exists because the combination of hydrogen and oxygen is at a mutually low-energy state.

TANSTAAFL... there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

A "water powered" car would require some other source of energy-- steam, for example can easily power a car.

Another possibility, would be something that splits the water-- the energy that goes in, would come out (save from what's lost to entropy). But if you had a water-splitting power source? Why not utilize that directly?

Of course, it could be that your energy source is less useful at powering a vehicle directly, than hydrogen + oxygen might be.

Say, in the case of a fuel cell which could create electricity from H2 and O2 directly.

And if your power-source were simply heat? You could use that to create super-heated steam, which if heated further, can split into h2 and o2. Of course-- at those temperatures, you'd have to keep those gases separate, or they'd simply re-combine right then.

:)

All in all, trying to use water as a "power source" is best left to gravity engines... you know... hydro-electrical damns.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15392 May 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, they can't make cars that "run on water," sadly. It's not really feasible for several reasons, most importantly physics. The amount of energy require to break the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen gas is three times the energy derived from igniting such gasses. It's a fun science experiment but was not effective in the long term, and is less efficient than even our electric cars.
Also, the "big oil company" thing you mentioned is, technically, a conspiracy theory, or as I call it, conspiracy nuttery. Oil companies make more money on plastics and textile production than anything, more factory new computers are sold every year than cars in a decade. Even with our technology recycling programs we use more virgin plastic on computers each year than any other product on the market, in the US and Europe at least. Oil companies also make no money off electricity production now, that's all coal, a different industry.
There are alternatives, the problem is that the lobbyists are all for their own pet corporations, all of them, even the "green" ones, all they want is to push for money into their corporations. One of the huge tax wasters is the raw material recycling companies now, I can go into detail if you want to change topics. But oil companies themselves don't even care about the fuel industry anymore, and while we're working on some great new bio-plastics, we will need the petroleum plastics for at least another century.
Yeah, when people think of oil, they just think gasoline. But there's a huge number of products that come from oil.

At the risk of sounding spammy, I was watching a company called Changing World Technologies (now bankrupt), but here's the wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changing_World_T...

They were trying to make oil with thermal depolymerization from waste products at a commercial level.

While not entirely a green type thing, it did have two things going for it - slowing the filling of landfills and easing the pressures of getting oil from abroad.

This is much different than water fueled cars as the company actually did create diesel fuel from discarded turkeys parts.:o

However, the process apparently stinks pretty bad and the plants need to be placed way out of the way. I'm thinking near Dick Cheney, George Bush and oil exec's ranches would be poetic justice.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15393 May 6, 2013
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, when people think of oil, they just think gasoline. But there's a huge number of products that come from oil.
At the risk of sounding spammy, I was watching a company called Changing World Technologies (now bankrupt), but here's the wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changing_World_T...
They were trying to make oil with thermal depolymerization from waste products at a commercial level.
While not entirely a green type thing, it did have two things going for it - slowing the filling of landfills and easing the pressures of getting oil from abroad.
This is much different than water fueled cars as the company actually did create diesel fuel from discarded turkeys parts.:o
However, the process apparently stinks pretty bad and the plants need to be placed way out of the way. I'm thinking near Dick Cheney, George Bush and oil exec's ranches would be poetic justice.
There have been processes to create "artificial" petrochemicals in the past.

Heck, during WW2, Germany experimented with these processes, mainly because the Allies had cut off all oil importation.

Every few years, we see another attempt to commercialize one or more of the processes.

I'm kinda bummed that these pioneering companies are not successful, as one day the oil WILL run out-- what will we do then?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15394 May 6, 2013
greymouser wrote:
This is much different than water fueled cars as the company actually did create diesel fuel from discarded turkeys parts.:o
However, the process apparently stinks pretty bad and the plants need to be placed way out of the way. I'm thinking near Dick Cheney, George Bush and oil exec's ranches would be poetic justice.
I have read up on biodiesel, or at least the cottage-industry methods used by smallish companies and individuals.

It is quite messy and smelly-- on a small scale. On large scale, the EPA would insist in air clean up, in the exhaust stacks, so it wouldn't be an issue, or it does not have to be.

One of the (currently) useless byproducts is glycol-- a kind of dirty, long-chain alcohol. Alas, it's too dirty to burn directly, so it's an unsatisfactory fuel-- but the small operators use it anyway, in spite of that.

Biodiesel is a good fuel, and modern engines like it very much-- in fact it works better than petro-diesel, as it has no sulfur compounds to corrode metal engine parts, and it leaves much less soot behind.

Alas, it has problems: it contains a bit less energy-per-liter than "regular" diesel, so mileage is lower. And it does not store long-term as well as petro-diesel. It will grow fungus, which clogs fuel filters. There's answers for that, of course.

Another problem with bio, is that it gets gel-like when too cold, and cannot be pumped at extreme low temperatures.

But it's 100% renewable. You can make biodiesel from anything that has fat in it-- like discarded turkey parts, or waste veggy oils/fats, or even waste animal fats too.

The process does involve hazardous chemicals (acid, wood alcohol) but those are not consumed entirely, and can be re-used with each cycle, with a small make-up addition as needed.

And the waste glycol is considered a mildly hazardous material-- on a large scale, disposal would be an issue.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15395 May 6, 2013
greymouser wrote:
This is much different than water fueled cars as the company actually did create diesel fuel from discarded turkeys parts.:o
However, the process apparently stinks pretty bad and the plants need to be placed way out of the way. I'm thinking near Dick Cheney, George Bush and oil exec's ranches would be poetic justice.
My favorite potential "green" fuel is sawgrass cellulose.

Sawgrass is basically a fast-growing weed. It will grow in arid areas that normal food crops would not thrive, so it would not directly compete for space.

It can be harvested multiple times a year (grass...) and grows quickly if watered regularly. It fixes it's own nitrogen too, so nitrogen-based fertilizers are not needed.

Alas, there is no "single step" cellulose-to-fuel step at present.

But the potential energy in cellulose is immense-- if we could make a cheap and easy process to convert cellulose into, say, ethanol, we'd have a lovely green fuel to power our cars for many years.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15396 May 6, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
Libertarian atheists millionaires notice that government is not needed.
All millionaires should be able to support themselves.
.... is the rest of mankind that is in trouble.
Hillary Clinton in 2016
Oh, I cannot resist...

Republican, Christian, Captains of Industry notice that government Defense Contracts are vital to the security of the nation at the expense of everything else.

For only by being bootstrappy, can you suck at the government teat.

And the world then be safe and secure to start Armageddon and force God to return Jesus to save us.

Excerpts from Project for the New American Century.

“ IT'S A CHOICE !!!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#15397 May 6, 2013
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038... Hhhmmm

*Can anyone tell me how they came up with this date?

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15398 May 6, 2013
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
I am quite shure: Fukushima was not the last affaire. There are hundreds of AKWs and we will witness more gaus. Radiation is a silent killer and it is going around the whole world.
Oh, preach it brother!

We must eliminate all radiation now.

First target should be that big, yellow thing that's in the sky radiating the earth all day with it's tanning rays.

For once we are free from the sun and it's gravitational pull will the Earth be truly free to explore the Universe!

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15399 May 6, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you stuttering?(Just like GWB the Great before 9/11!!)
Why should we feel shame? We are not against death penalty or killing.!!
It is you who are unable to decide what to do!!
"We are not against death penalty or killing.!!"

That, right there, is why you should feel shame.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#15400 May 6, 2013
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, preach it brother!
We must eliminate all radiation now.
First target should be that big, yellow thing that's in the sky radiating the earth all day with it's tanning rays.
For once we are free from the sun and it's gravitational pull will the Earth be truly free to explore the Universe!
Next up-- carefully destroy all those radioactive smoke detectors, that are protecting our homes from fires.

They all contain a bit of radioactive isotope-- Horrors!

... must .. destroy.. all...'nook-you-lur' enemies ...

<laughing>

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15401 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, there is that-- compartmentalization. It's how they manage to hold several conflicting ideas (their bible) in their head at once...
Yep. Shameless plug here

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

Reading The Authoritarians was quite a an eye opener for me. At the risk of Confirmation Bias, it helped explain a lot of the really bizarre things I see in religious and politics debates (well, shouting past each other threads).

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15402 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes... they are not aware enough to NOT be victims of computer fraud-- what with them already being victims of ideological fraud...
It doesn't surprise me. When you think of which websites are likely to give you a virus, you might think the dirty and naughty porn sites. After all, them women must harbor a collection of diseases, bible-right?

Well, let me google that for you...

http://lmgtfy.com/...

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#15403 May 6, 2013
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, when people think of oil, they just think gasoline. But there's a huge number of products that come from oil.
At the risk of sounding spammy, I was watching a company called Changing World Technologies (now bankrupt), but here's the wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changing_World_T...
They were trying to make oil with thermal depolymerization from waste products at a commercial level.
While not entirely a green type thing, it did have two things going for it - slowing the filling of landfills and easing the pressures of getting oil from abroad.
This is much different than water fueled cars as the company actually did create diesel fuel from discarded turkeys parts.:o
However, the process apparently stinks pretty bad and the plants need to be placed way out of the way. I'm thinking near Dick Cheney, George Bush and oil exec's ranches would be poetic justice.
The irony is that it would actually be a new one of many uses for landfills. Many landfills are now "capped" off to siphon natural gas from, and some are even harvested for clay after a few decades as well. The problem is that there are not enough landfills to fill the need so they are still looking for other sources for these materials.

Recycling product only works for metals, all other products need more virgin materials to make the recycled product viable again than just a plain virgin product, but shh, the "green" lobbyist supporters will deny that. When you look at the big picture, our species is really doing less damage per capita than it was before we even used plastic now, the problem is that we have too many capita.:P

As for oil, the problem is the "reserves" our country stockpiles, which forces us to import in order to fill the need. But meh, if they don't find a solution that actually works soon ... the scientists will come to the rescue (again) and find an alternative that will make their entire oil nonsense obsolete anyway. That's what big corporations pay scientists to do.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#15404 May 6, 2013
Snevaeh legna wrote:
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038... Hhhmmm
*Can anyone tell me how they came up with this date?
Well, it's based on the trends. Religiosity is declining by a certain percentage each year, which increase by a steady amount, do some math ... bam, 2038.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15405 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes-- water exists because the combination of hydrogen and oxygen is at a mutually low-energy state.
TANSTAAFL... there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
A "water powered" car would require some other source of energy-- steam, for example can easily power a car.
Another possibility, would be something that splits the water-- the energy that goes in, would come out (save from what's lost to entropy). But if you had a water-splitting power source? Why not utilize that directly?
Of course, it could be that your energy source is less useful at powering a vehicle directly, than hydrogen + oxygen might be.
Say, in the case of a fuel cell which could create electricity from H2 and O2 directly.
And if your power-source were simply heat? You could use that to create super-heated steam, which if heated further, can split into h2 and o2. Of course-- at those temperatures, you'd have to keep those gases separate, or they'd simply re-combine right then.
:)
All in all, trying to use water as a "power source" is best left to gravity engines... you know... hydro-electrical damns.
And you are trying to split fresh water too. A resource that is already getting scarce even though it falls from the sky. or not.

Let's ask Phoenix and Los Angeles about water. I bet they have something to say about it.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#15406 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Next up-- carefully destroy all those radioactive smoke detectors, that are protecting our homes from fires.
They all contain a bit of radioactive isotope-- Horrors!
... must .. destroy.. all...'nook-you-lur' enemies ...
<laughing>
Don't forget microwaves, video screens, radios, cellphones, landline telephones, refrigerators, stoves, fireplaces, lightbulbs (even the new ones), fire pits, lightning, powerlines, batteries, or, and pacemakers.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#15407 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
There have been processes to create "artificial" petrochemicals in the past.
Heck, during WW2, Germany experimented with these processes, mainly because the Allies had cut off all oil importation.
Every few years, we see another attempt to commercialize one or more of the processes.
I'm kinda bummed that these pioneering companies are not successful, as one day the oil WILL run out-- what will we do then?
As far as I know, CWT was the first commercial venture on an industrial scale to attempt it. I'm probably wrong on whether it was the first, but when I ran across it 10 years ago, I was intrigued. They had improved the conversion efficiency but still had a lot of hurdles to overcome, most notably the price per barrel of oil. Kinda like the Alberta tar sands aren't economically feasible unless oil is something like $80 a barrel.

So was that large scale experiment wasted money?

If you are a Republican, yes. It didn't return a profit.

However, that could have been used for tax breaks (if you can afford the right tax lawyer).

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#15408 May 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget microwaves, video screens, radios, cellphones, landline telephones, refrigerators, stoves, fireplaces, lightbulbs (even the new ones), fire pits, lightning, powerlines, batteries, or, and pacemakers.
Speaking of energy have you guys seen this:-
https://lasers.llnl.gov/

When they finally get it going all bets are off.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 7 min Thinking 226,571
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 7 hr Thinking 5,921
The Ultimate Evidence of God 11 hr James 68
The myth of the angry atheist 23 hr _Bad Company 3
Our world came from nothing? Mon Patrick 436
It seems there are more Atheists in the Christi... (Jun '13) Mon Patrick 13
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom Sat religionislies 58
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••