Germany gets contracts for american highspeed train system

[RETS]

You can insult me but you are afraid to debate me? I am skilled in nuclear knowledge, I assure you. I will start a thread about the future of nuclear power and you can chime in with knowledge if you like.

That was not an insult- That was fact. You do not respect me, and I cannot bring myself to respect you. As such, any attempted debate would eventually, and perhaps inevitably, devolve into something ugly.

I would prefer not to even begin.

As to the question of me being afraid of you... Sadiqi, I would not be afraid of you if you were standing in front of me. What makes you think I would be afraid of you through the internet?

 

[Gawron]

I have already explained how it is Socialist.

Listen, I know who you really are. Therefore I refuse to be drawn into another extended debate characterized by extensive use of the side-step, accusations of the use of the ad hominem attack while continusously employing ad-hominem attacks, and opinions given from the assumed position of superiority by you with little or no support provided by you, or claims that everyone is simply afraid to "debate" you because we are all either so ignorant or afraid.

Have a nice day.

 

[IbrahimFahim]

That was not an insult- That was fact. You do not respect me, and I cannot bring myself to respect you. As such, any attempted debate would eventually, and perhaps inevitably, devolve into something ugly.

I would prefer not to even begin.

As to the question of me being afraid of you... Sadiqi, I would not be afraid of you if you were standing in front of me. What makes you think I would be afraid of you through the internet?

You will come off poorly in a debate over nuclear power. Your knowledge base is not extensive enough or deep enough to engage in a serious conversation. Unless you have worked in the nuclear industry you would be disadvantaged.

 

[RETS]

You will come off poorly in a debate over nuclear power. Your knowledge base is not extensive enough or deep enough to engage in a serious conversation. Unless you have worked in the nuclear industry you would be disadvantaged.

Hear me quaking in my boots.


You truly are a fool if you believe that my refusal has to do with anything more than simply not wishing to get into a pointless urination contest. By your claims, you must have a doctorate in nearly every subject under the sun. If that were the case, than everyone truly would be out of their league in debating you. However, the glaring inconsistencies in your statements point to a person who may be educated, but lacks common sense, decency and respect. Moreover, even holders of multiple PhD awards tend to stagnate, especially when convinced of their own superiority, (which you clearly are), making them weak in any debate.

As such, once more, I decline to go any further than the odd back and forth with you on any topic.

 

[IbrahimFahim]

Hear me quaking in my boots.


You truly are a fool if you believe that my refusal has to do with anything more than simply not wishing to get into a pointless urination contest. By your claims, you must have a doctorate in nearly every subject under the sun. If that were the case, than everyone truly would be out of their league in debating you. However, the glaring inconsistencies in your statements point to a person who may be educated, but lacks common sense, decency and respect. Moreover, even holders of multiple PhD awards tend to stagnate, especially when convinced of their own superiority, (which you clearly are), making them weak in any debate.

As such, once more, I decline to go any further than the odd back and forth with you on any topic.

Well, I have to admit, when it comes to simple history, I do not have to plagiarize Wikipedia.

 

[RETS]

Well, I have to admit, when it comes to simple history, I do not have to plagiarize Wikipedia.

No, you have to misrepresent, misinterpret and revise it. I have to wonder, with that statement, just how much of what you've ever posted could be found within some poor schmucks college paper.

Regardless, that comment does not dignify further response.

 

[IbrahimFahim]

I have already explained how it is Socialist.

Listen, I know who you really are. Therefore I refuse to be drawn into another extended debate characterized by extensive use of the side-step, accusations of the use of the ad hominem attack while continusously employing ad-hominem attacks, and opinions given from the assumed position of superiority by you with little or no support provided by you, or claims that everyone is simply afraid to "debate" you because we are all either so ignorant or afraid.

Have a nice day.

I am sorry, this is not true. You cut and pasted an entire article that claimed it was socialist, but the article was wrong.

Socialism is ...

Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources. A socialist society is characterised by a free association, which is not based on coercive wage labour. It is organized on the basis of relatively equal power relations, self-management, collective decision-making and adhocracy rather than hierarchical, bureaucratic forms of organization in the economic and political systems.
As an economic system, socialism is a system of production and allocation based on the direct production of use-values by allocating economic inputs, the means of production and investment through planning to directly satisfy economic demand. Economic calculation is based on either calculation-in-kind, some physical magnitude or a direct measure of labour time. Output for individual consumption is distributed through markets, and distribution of income is based on individual merit or individual contribution.

Nothing you cut and pasted fits this definition, or any other definition of socialism I have ever seen. Can you please explain the discrepancy between your claims and the actual definition of the political philosophy?

 

[MorkandMindy]

Sore because I stated he wasn't my brother?


As a matter of fact- Feel free to read up on it. (Point of interest- A quick Google search will turn all of these up and more.)


The Energy From Thorium webpage.

Article from The Columbus Dispatch: "The Mighty Thorium."

Thorium Energy Inc webpage.

The webpage of the Thorium Energy Alliance.

Article from London's The Independent: "Is Thorium the Answer to Our Energy Crisis?" (dated from 2006!!)

An article from the magazine Wired.

What the World Nuclear Association has to say on the subject: Thorium.

Wikipedia- Included only because everyone expects it to be, and because I help to edit... Hey, I can have ulterior motives!


Finally, this is what got me really thinking about Thorium- the W-T-F.

Wow, I always wondered what '[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]' stood for.


OK, I'll try that again - I always wondered what 'W-T-F' stood for.



I like the idea of a Thorium nuclear battery powered train. It could be mixed in with diesel-powered trains as both could work on non electrified tracks, and progressively replace them in the future.


I guess the price (capital, maintenance, efficiency) of supplying electricity to the enormous mileage of track required in the Central and Western parts of the US, must be the core argument for portable power rather than stationary generators as with a electrified system.


One argument in favour of electrified track could be the ease of returning energy as the train brakes, as a lot of the energy in the more populated areas could be lost in the acceleration / braking cycle. But the Thorium battery I assume must have substantial energy storage, so the regenerative braking can just go back there I hope.


If you get the petroleum industries on board the thorium powered train instead of handing it to Westinghouse or GE, we should find the media and therefore the public welcome thorium-powered trains with open arms.

 

[IbrahimFahim]

Wow, I always wondered what '[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]' stood for.


OK, I'll try that again - I always wondered what 'W-T-F' stood for.



I like the idea of a Thorium nuclear battery powered train. It could be mixed in with diesel-powered trains as both could work on non electrified tracks, and progressively replace them in the future.


I guess the price (capital, maintenance, efficiency) of supplying electricity to the enormous mileage of track required in the Central and Western parts of the US, must be the core argument for portable power rather than stationary generators as with a electrified system.


One argument in favour of electrified track could be the ease of returning energy as the train brakes, as a lot of the energy in the more populated areas could be lost in the acceleration / braking cycle. But the Thorium battery I assume must have substantial energy storage, so the regenerative braking can just go back there I hope.


If you get the petroleum industries on board the thorium powered train instead of handing it to Westinghouse or GE, we should find the media and therefore the public welcome thorium-powered trains with open arms.

Unfortunately the Thorium idea is more science-fiction rather than science. All throium does is get you to U-233, which is a plain old uranium reactor, which is nowhere near ready for portable train use. I addressed it here.

I suspect his information comes from a Popular Science article. It is interesting, entertaining, but not feasible at the present time.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I didn't think there was enough information to agree or disagree with the 'thorium fuelled vehicle' concept.

There is a small (20 MW) liquid salt reactor design that keeps a fairly constant amount of U233 and uses as the fertile feed material thorium, but the prospect of it going 200mph and having an accident is quite worrying. Hyperion wants to make them as stationary power stations for remote areas in Indonesia I think it was, but I'm not sure if they've made any yet.

Alternatively the isotope was not specified so I thought there was a possibility RETS had in mind a battery that used a thorium nuclide and would come apart into sealed components in the event of a smash and therefore be regarded as safe.

I'm here to get information and hope others are doing the same.

I'm also here to improve my ability to explain things and to clarify what I am thinking, so I will discuss things and give reasons and such, but when people just say 'you're wrong' that is pointless so I don't reply, and yes, that has occasionally happened:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7517852/

If I was here to persuade then I might be tempted to be more pushy, but given that I don't have clear answers to most questions myself that is a bit unlikely.

I do also get myself into some predicaments because I do sympathise with a lot of people, Muslims because we have no right to go bombing their countries, though to be fair we also bomb lots of other countries, and also anti medical people and anyone concerned about the environment and stopping wars.

And I post to take my mind off the stress at work which is severe.

I think I've settled myself enough now to go to bed; got a 4 AM start tomorrow (!) ...

 

[A Is A]

Screw this train systems, give us the jet packs and hovercars we were promised by Doc Savage.

 

[IbrahimFahim]

Screw this train systems, give us the jet packs and hovercars we were promised by Doc Savage.

That's kind of the science Popular Science, and related periodicals pander to. Sure it is science, sort of, but not really practical or workable. Hover cars are certainly cool, but not going to be in mass production any time soon.

The Thorium reactor (likely lithium cooled) is a perfect example.

 

[ErikSteiner]

that and nuclear fusion. Since 40 years they tell us, they made it in 40 years.