Hello Len. I don’t know you at all, except what I’ve learnt through your posts on this site, and it would be presumptious of me to make an evaluation of your mind processes without more information. So I won’t be drawn into a personal attack, however much I would like to slaughter you. We have all read your posts on religion, UFO’s and Green Energy, and I must tell you that, by reading the replies, I am not convinced that you have made too many converts. However, personally I would like to caution you about your mildly abusive remarks to Luthon64. To my mind, his replies to you were well founded.
I would also like to add that skepticism (or scepticism) is a very sane way of looking at all the things that people dream up. It’s not that skeptics will not believe anything. Rather, as a rule, they don’t believe everything. Cynicism, on the other hand, is very much kin to …
About UFO’s: Bring us a little green (or grey or whatever) man, and we’ll believe you. If a green, or otherwise, creature is not available, bring us a piece of their technology, an artifact of whatever kind that can be shown to be of extraterrestial manufacture, and we’ll believe you. Or bring us proof that a “drive” of some sort, a means of travelling (spanning, bridging) the vast distances between star systems exists, and we’ll believe you. Bring us anything that is a proof, and I mean proof, of extraterrestial technology, and we’ll believe you. Words are cheap. Surely, nothing proves that people (including youself, it seems) will believe anything more conclusively than the proven fact that people believe in God. Statues that bleed, seas that split, people of flesh and blood that ascend to heaven, immaculate conceptions, life after death, we’ll believe anything. But PROOF, there’s the rub.
As concerns green energy: I tried to go to the site you provide, and I tell you, it’s just too much bother for nothing, so I just gave up. But maybe you can provide, through this site, what I couldn’t find there. I would appreciate it. The only forms of (so-called) green energy (in this part of the universe anyway) are those that one can get by exploiting natural processes, and even then it can be argued that one is interfering with nature and that the energy is therefore not entirely “green”. You can compost manure to get all sorts of nasty-smelling gases that you can then burn in the atmosphere releasing CO2 and burning O2. So that, although called green, is not very green. Or you can use energy from the Sun or from the wind or from the motion of the sea. Or you can use heat from the magma beneath your feet. The alternative is fusion of fission… well, maybe in years to come for fusion.
Now all these forms of green energy have a downside. If you want to use the Sun, you must manufacture light sensitive cells (Hubble uses them) or you can use infrared to heat some sort of fluid that you can move from place to place. Cells are VERY expensive and must be disposed of in the environment, which makes them a bit off-green. Ditto for infrared systems. Ditto for wind powered alternators. To use sea waves one has to use huge systems due to the very low potential at which that energy is available. Not a good alternative. As the man said, your understanding of science is not too deep.
But I want to add something else: The fact that people blame “gevernments” for obfuscations is an easy way out of not being able to provide proof. And what’s more, governments do indeed need laws to protect their secrets. Having been involved in projects that needed security in a time of dangers from without, I understand and endorse certain security measures (although I am not in favour of muzzling the press).
There’s much more to be said about all this, and books have been and are still written about it. Please get a few good ones.