dimreepr

Well, it used to be god, but for very different reasons (jesus was an anti-bully), failing that perhaps superman... How about a thousand men or women armed with antitank weapons, drone IEDs, or Molotov cocktails? I can't think of a better excuse to run them down with my 'better tank' that includes anti-antitank weapons and Molotov cock remover's... 😉

It was always a long shot, bc money now is more persuasive than life tomorrow. Australia has the natural resources to supply its own nuclear program virtually free, but for some reason the top brass didn't like that idea. They're an example of why I put this question in ethics. But in the case of fusion, there hasn't been any successful launches; so what would be wrong with letting Elon and his cronies take the reins, leave the public fund's free to help in a more productive way 🤞.

No, it's just inappropriate...

Who designed it?

You're missing my point, I'm not saying we stop understanding that, I'm saying we put it on the back-burner until we're out of the wood's and we spend that money on a media blitz, that would persuade even Australia to mine uranium instead of coal; only when we've achieved, 'at least', that do we stoke the fire again.

Don't be obtuse, it's clearly a metaphor so how can it be absurd? Ukraine is a different topic, this topic is 'how to overthrow a tyrant'. Back to the point, it's a matter of number's (of poeple who are just comfortable enough, and just fearful enough to not say anything) and the balance (of people who don't care about the terror, bc it's better than the life they've got), in the end it's always the people that decide what power the tyrant is allowed. America is famous for it, they chased the tyrant out, but they didn't depose the tyrant... 😉

It's more of an excuse to prevaricate...

Or, in a brave new world, someone thinks for themselves; it's a real struggle to imagine which is best...

Where is my mind

That's got nothing to do with the point I'm making, we live in a world that has artificial light that can be powered by clean energy, we don't need to chase the ultimate incandescent filament...

It's a balance, a thousand armed soldiers just makes a bigger compost heap. A thousand armed florists will just take it in turns to stand in front of the tank, they're far more difficult to avoid, with a reasonable excuse.

As I've mentioned it's a matter of number's, for instance, if you want to take the fight to a battle tank, what do think is more effective, a thousand men with hand guns or a single man armed with a flower? What fills more column inches? South Africa was defeated by the press. Even Russia is vulnerable to the flower attack, when the time is right...

It's painful to watch...

Indeed, nothing is ever free...😉

How do you know if she's telling the truth? I'm not saying she's wrong, I'm saying you're not thinking for yourself; who you believe in, depends on what you want to believe, which depends on your satisfaction of life. In a brave new world, a perfect authoritarian thinks for everyone and everyone is happy about it.

When is the operative word here, there is no realistic prospect of a 'when'; it's akin to a perpetual motion machine, if a respected physicist said "there's no law in physics to say it can't work.". If the private sector want to chase the rainbow, then all power to their elbow, I just think my taxation is better spent...

Indeed, as was my implication... Yet fission has less respect, while providing a much more viable product...

Thank you for addressing the question I asked, +1 I understand that that piece of the pie is tiny, but as I said this is an ethical question; for instance, is money better spent on advertising the benefits of fission over fusion? It's like the NHS, in Britain, everyone has a claim to free treatment; but if the drugs cost too much...

Why not? That's like asking, why isn't my foot just as likely to think for itself. Because that's what it takes to make things work. Yes. Maybe, the anthill is conscious, it's like it built itself. Mostly bc they have brain's, don't be confused by the apparent intelligence from those that don't... 🙄

I have, the gravity we have is 1, the gavity we need is a lot more than that, the ethical question I pose is, is there a need to reproduce this on earth? When we can use it for free, now... And, perhaps, it's twin in a much more efficient way.

I believe a lot of things, almost always bc the argument is persuasive... 🙄

That's got nothing to do with the question I'm asking; we're never going to forget that fusion is possible, it just takes a lot more gravity than we have avaliable. I'm suggesting that our resources are better spent, before we run out...

This is an ethical question, the numbers don't matter if it's not part of the solution.

That's doesn't answer the question, I'm not suggesting we shut down humanities R and D department, just the one that doesn't seem to work, after all this time and mental efforts. Our time and efforts are better spent on projects that do work, you know the clock is ticking, right?

The problem is, all the evidence you present does nothing to change mainstream/conventional thinking which thinks you're wrong; this is my last hint mate. 😉 Just for clarity, I mean you need a better argument. 🖖