Moontanman

This global warming thing is a strange concept, i don't doubt the Earth is getting warmer, i don't doubt it's primarily driven by human activity.

I do doubt the Earth is supposed to be colder or has a set point that is supposed to benefit us or even complex life in general or life at all. I do believe life has an effect in the feed back mechanism that controls the earths set point but to say the Earth has to be a certain temp is the height of hubris and ignores a half a billion years of temps that were much warmer and much colder than now.

Yes we are driving the temps right now but that could change, if we actually reversed the CO2 content and went back to pre human level we might be under a mile of ice for all we know. The earth is not set for us, it is simply what it is.

We should do our best to be as small as possible as a driver of climate, mostly because we do not really know how to control such a complex thing. It's like flying an airplane and not having a clue as to how to do it. at best you make as few and as small changes as absolutely necessary.

With unlimited resources and no need for menial labor of any kind, that could easily be accomplished. I've got to wonder, though, how many in such a society would instead spend their entire life goofing off rather than working? Eg playing computer games, watching TV, playing sports, or going on adventures.

I honestly wonder if given the chance people would eventually tire of such things and pursue the serious. i am sure there are people who would never grow out of childhood but I am just a sure that most would. As things are now most people are forced to grow up by outside imposed time tables but given the chance i think most people have internal time tables that would eventually kick in.

Did anyone get my reference to Colossus?

Check out this list.

 

I thought about maybe writing a novel where a supercomputer makes all the complicated political decisions for mankind. haha

 

So maybe... Artificial Intelligence dictatorship?

This is the voice of World Control. I bring you peace. It may be the Peace of Plenty and Content or the Peace of Unvaried Death.

Colossus

I seen some claims of aircraft like this but they are characterized as stealth blimps not nuclear powered physics busting craft. I think a rumor has gotten out of hand.

When you are old and broken down running hurts.....

Are you supporting my idea that all religions and faiths are just a misconception of something as natural as energy?

 

You haven't said that, you have said we should believe in the supernatural instead of looking for natural explanations. If we had simply assumed Ra to always be god would we have ever stumbled across the real nature of the sun? I think not.

 

Should we just try to see through a rational mind or should we use intuition and then rationalize it or what?

 

Neither, we should follow the evidence, if we hadn't kept on looking we would all still be Ra worshipers. What we perceive as rational isn't always true nor is irrational always untrue, you are trying to set the goal posts down to your own idea of what they should be. We should investigate the evidence for what it is not what we want or think it should be.

When prayer is mentioned who are we talking about praying to? Ra? Zeus, Jupiter? The Moon Goddess? Thor? Jesus? The Universe in general? People used to pray to Ra, Ra was all powerful, now we know Ra is just a natural phenomenon powered by a type of fusion. What does this indicate about other "supernatural" entities? So your God is real but mine isn't? Hers is but his isn't? Your supernatural has meaning but mine doesn't? Who do we pray to so we are sure it has an effect? Who decides, who is really neutral enough to make such a decision? Maybe someone who doesn't believe in either one? Possibly we should start out neutral and look for evidence of what we see happening around us.... no wait that's science.....

I have to ask, please excuse me if I seem dense, but isn't everyone equating socialism and communism as the same or at least similar things? Here in the US people are saying socialist in the same way they used to say communist. I used to think there was a real difference between the two but now i wonder if i ever knew anything. Aren't all governments by definition to some extent socialist? If the government takes care of the people in any way at all isn't that at least socialist in a small way? And with the big government bail outs doesn't make government at least partly communistic? What is going on? disinformation? Or simply a game who can call who the worst names?

I can't watch the video either but I'm betting when it's used on humans the animal of choice for the scaffolding isn't going to be a rabbit.....

It works the same way gravity does, denser things displace less dense things out of the way.

To late!

It seems that all of America has degenerated into nothing but a shouting match, no right no wrong just who can shout the loudest and be the most obtuse. I am so very tired of polarization it has the potential to screw us all. Far to many people who only want to hear what they believe in or agree with and far too many people willing to tell them what they want to hear. Really very sad, what ever happened to really looking at the issues? Doesn't any one ever get tired of getting sunshine pumped up their skirt? Why is it so popular to be selfish and smug?

If that is even possible. What if food systems begin to collapse in a few hundred years from it. Sure you will be dead, but would you in the now what to be responsible for all of that death, human and otherwise?

 

I don't understand why you are asking me this, I never said I wasn't willing to help or currently not doing any thing to help.

 

Rapid environmental change is never really a good thing for life. Sure some stuff may live, and undoubtedly will, but what, and how will that look. With all of the risk, why risk it? I don't want acid oceans anymore then I want plastic oceans. I want our biosphere to be stable, not static. I don't want poisonous foods, poisoned air and water.

 

I think you are closing the door after the horse has left the barn, again I see no reason for you quote me and say these things. We do need to try and get a handle on any human inputs into all pollution and global warming, to say other wise is really not very intelligent.

 

 

While this goes away directly from GW, the point about GW is that the impact will be negative to the current global theme anyway you look at it. You will have massive extinctions coupled with all kinds of other change such as invasive species, invasive everything because the global environment again will be changed by GW. Can anyone really speculate what will happen when all the ice melts? That is serious dramatic change in a relatively short period of time.

 

 

Of course change is going to be negative on many currently ecological niches. Change always does have some negative impact. The Cretaceous extinction was damn negative from the stand point of most of Earth's creatures but to us it was a great thing.

 

 

IF you increase CO2 you increase all of its effects. The more or you do this the more change you cause, its really quite simple. I could easily see America if not the industrial world being able to change to something else easily within twenty years if it was truly desired. Point of fact though is its not. That change could easily stave off so much.

 

20 years? You have no clue, it's not just the industrial nations any more, it's every one. The USA and other industrial nations have been changing since I was first aware of what was going on 50 years ago. sometimes it was very fast, some things were not, but change is not something humans do fast. I look around me and I am often amazed we have come so far so fast. you have to have been around when things were much worse to be able to see how much better they actually are. if we could get the crazies to stop doing every thing in their power to demonize much of the change things would go faster. 40 years ago we could have changed from petroleum powering our vehicles to natural gas, would it have been a miracle cure ? No but it would have been much cleaner much faster and put us in a natural evolution toward other technologies that would have been much better but the people who wanted change wanted total change all at once and so we got nothing. any time you push too hard to fast you create problems. It has happened it will again, things are changing about as fast as economics and humans can allow for.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

And you cannot say that it will not be just as bad for the environment can you? You can assume that it won't be but that would be the same as assuming that we will or will not survive. There is no definitive answer one way or another. It could be worse, good enough reason to do something about it.

 

Why do you keep saying this? I never said it was a good thing, just an unknown thing. You are looking through human colored glasses take them off and you'll see the changes will not wipe out the earth's ecosystems only change them. the incentive for us is to keep us from being wiped away in favor of another ecosystem we cannot live with.

 

 

 

Too my knowledge nobody has ever said that it would. The fact that it's a possibility if frightening enough for most people to take notice. And I on the other hand have read studies that say it is a possibility. Research runaway greenhouse effect.

 

The Earth has been much warmer than it is now and a much higher CO2 level as well. The Earth has also been much colder, almost frozen over from one pole to the other. runaway greenhouse is a concept that doesn't specifically say the Earth will go that way due to human input. You are grandstanding and exaggerating. these things will only serve to make people ignore you.

You base the last statement on a LOT of assumptions. Nobody really knows the true implications of global warming. If we do not know that how do you know that things will be better? What makes you think you know so much about something we barely understand?

 

I never said things will be better, all we can know is they will be different. Just because the changes might be bad for humans doesn't mean the earth is going to die or that the ecology cannot adapt. I think the data shows we know a lot more than you seem to understand.

 

As it stands we may not be able to stop global warming but we should try because there is no information about how the world will end up as a result because of it. For example, a run-away greenhouse effect could lead the Earth to end up like Venus.

 

Again I never said we shouldn't try to slow down out own climate inputs, I think it is just as disingenuous to say the Earth will end up like Venus as it is to say global warming is false. I've seen no studies what so ever that suggest the Earth becoming like Venus due to human inputs.

My problem with global warming is the idea so so human orientated. Every thing seems to center around keeping the planet just like it is or was or should be or some other rather arbitrary idea.

The Earth changes, are we at least one of the engines of the current change? Almost certainly. Could there be other factors involved? Almost certainly. Will the Earth and it's ecology survive global warming? Almost certainly. Would it be better for the Earth to change slower? Almost certainly.

If the evidence we have is any indication much of the history of complex life on Earth has been on a much warmer earth than we see now. Will humans get the shitty end of the stick from climate change? Almost certainly. We will have to adapt, maybe actually do some things different, make choices that are less than self centered, or maybe even make choices that even more self centered.

One thing is sure, change is coming, at this point who done it, isn't as important as how do we make sure humanity survives, grows, and learns from what is happening.

If we had deepspace spacecraft what would they look like,

.

Ah something like this?

This is pretty much what you asked for, you may as well take the warp drive too.

I wanna be a centaur, is that science fictiony enough?

I liked bubbling CO2 through arragonite.

I checked out the site, interesting the tank of the month was a 34 gallon nano reef, I saw several 2.5 gallons "reefs" nothing like what you are claiming and not near sucessfull as you seem to be. I guess you are the best of them all?

Merged post follows:

Lot so very nice Nano reefs, lots more detail about keeping them, if you had been a bit more forth coming maybe we could have avoided this conversation but I still see no .5 gallon reefs.

dang man you get all mad im back at work now, have to be short again but I'll gear it up tonite. thanks for responding

 

Not mad dude, I never take this stuff personally.

 

So we are back to square one, my video and all the pics are fake right> the coralline, the glass growth, the micro table top, it's all fake you still say. what about the 8-9 years of web postings I've made under my pseudonym, are those all fake too, and the reefs.org nanos forum which I moderate is all fake jeeze I also did the Kennedy job too and the bogus moonwalk, clearly my photoshopping and video editing was and is still able to trick the masses.

 

None of is proof and you know it.

 

Out of the volumes I've typed, just tell me this cuz I have to be brief until 6 pm. You agreed 2.5 gallon tanks work, so where is the cutoff point in your observation that a smaller tank will not work, and what exactly causes the death. This really is beating a dead horse man, but I got a little energy left.

 

Oh contrare, a 2.5 gallon tank only works over the short term I never said it would be a stable self contained reef. You are the one making claims about tiny self contained reefs, even freshwater isn't self contained. I mentioned an eight square foot bottomed tank not a 2.5 gallon tank. I've kept the small reef tanks they require an extraordinary amount of effort compared to say a 70 gallon tank and are much more expensive both in $ per gallon and actual cost.

 

 

Lets poll the public, you all think Im faking? making up all this junk and spending all this money and wasting all this time just to make Mr. Moon mad? Or, do new things always get met with hesitation aka spanish inquisition...can someone other than moon please write a sensible detraction to any specific thing I've said in all these pages, hit me with your best shot please so I can win this guy as my buddy

 

Popular vote will never be proof, you upset me only because I do not like to see people mislead into thinking a tiny reef is easy. I am not mad, i have not attacked you personally, i think you are just misleading us, i hope by just not giving us all the pertinent details. often when something comes easy to someone, and I am guilty of this as well, it is easy to forget the details of how it was done. I want you to sit back and think about all the details of what it really takes to set up and keep a tiny reef. I think you'll realize you are leaving some stuff out. If I thought you were intentionally lying I would be pissed off. If you don't think my problems with your ideas and pics are reasonable I'll leave you alone to twist in the water current by yourself.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

First off i lost all my stuff almost ten years ago, financial meltdowns are bad but even then i never was one to take pics of my tanks. I had them on display around town and in my house. I don't see how a pic can be proof of what you say. i am still active in the reef tank community mostly as a consultant mainly because I genuinely cannot afford the expense of reef aquariums any more. if you don't like my critique of your methods then outline what you do by doing more than just making claims. How do you start out? how do you do what you do? Showing pics of what you do is as useless as me saying I call down UFOs and offering pics of unusual lights in the sky as proof. You claim to be so well known well guess what so am I my name is not moon or Moontanman it is Michael Hissom. I have been influencing Marine aquaria for more than 40 years. I've set up several pet shops and I had a live coral propagation business going 20 years ago. I honestly don't know if I'm all over the net or not. I know I've spent most of the last ten to fifteen years keeping and breeding fish native to the southern USA. Getting points for my posts are not important to me but being honest tis. You post exactly how you do what you do and I'll post what I do, i admit a preference for very large aquariums but that is just me. I remember very well the old days when coral was impossible and coral grew so slow (maybe an inch a century or something equally silly) Oh yes, light was the evil enemy to a marine aquarium and everything had to be sterile as the moon to work. Adding something from the ocean without sterilizing it was so stupid. We've come a long way since the early 70's if you can rewrite the ideas yet again then do it by actually giving us the details not just by making claims and showing pics.

Ok, you have made this claim.

All I can do is swear to you they are self contained

This is simply Bullshit, a 1000 gallon aquarium of any type much less a reef tank is not self contained. The oceans of the earth are not self contained over geological time spans. A .5 gallon reef tank is simply not capable of being self contained in any realistic definition of the term. There are no processes that could be contained in such a small container that could allow it to be "self contained"

Now having said that there are coral like animals (I say coral like because you seem to want to use the word to describe any of the many and often unrelated organisms that people see and call coral) That are pretty tough, I have collected via scuba diving a great many colonial organisms, when I first started out there were no "coral like organisms" available any other way. I've collected them from under bridges near sewage outflows and even in freshwater. Yes there are freshwater colonial organisms.

I think your post is disingenuous because you have failed to point out that the organisms you are culturing are not exactly the classic coral reef organisms most people think of when they think coral reef.

Please stop saying I don't know because I haven't tried, I was having live coral heads shipped from Hawaii to me 40 years ago, I personally pioneered both live rock and metal halide lighting on reef tanks. I've kept reef organisms in glass globes and even and old 1500 watt light bulb. One real rule is the smaller that container the more outside support you need and the shorter the lifespan of the container. I think i could probably set up an aquarium with an eight square foot bottom area that would be stable for decades with enough outside support. But there are things that build up that cannot be recycled in the scale of personal aquaria that would mean that eventually the tank would have to be taken down and redone. your tiny tanks would require such a tear down every few weeks at least at my best estimate.

next the very idea of using frozen food to feed such a small container is fatally flawed. Frozen food means the inner contents of the cells of the organism is being bled out into the water, rising takes away much of it but not all. Only live food is suitable for tiny containers. rotifiers are my choice for polyps, copepods for larger animals and yes i do culture all of them.

Take away your assertion these containers are easy or do not require huge amounts of maintenance and outside support and I'll quit twisting your nipples but if you keep on I'll twist them off Displaying a tank full of Coraline algae and star polyps is not proof of or even reason to believe you can set up a self contained .5 gallon reef aquarium.

All of the tanks you show could be and most probably are simply tiny displays that were once connected to a larger system and if not reconnected will die just like a huge coral head would die off in a small aquarium. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on most of it but the assertion this is a self contained reef tank sis just not in the realm of possibility and that not because i haven't tried it.

There are so many problems here, the heat from your lights would drive up the temps in such a tiny container, aeration would result in problems both with and with out it. I am still active in reefs and just because someone makes claims on the net doesn't make it true. The pic of the tiny tank in your car is so strange, was it air tight? why isn't it pressing down in the seat like something was full of water should? i see so many things that scream illusion. If you can really keep a "pico" reef that is self contained and stable long term then you my friend have really done something, I have some friends at NASA that would be interested in seeing your processes I am sure.

Ok, what do you feed them?

What is your light source?

What are the chemical parameters?

What trace elements to do you add

Exactly what species are being kept in each of the different sizes of bowls

I want to believe you i really do but i can just look at your pics and see many things that prove to me you are being misleading. 40 years of experience being on the cutting edge of both aquarium husbandry and coral propagation gives you deep instincts and what you are claiming looks to me like what it looks like for someone to claim faster than light information transfer does to a real physicist. You need to show why what you claim works, just showing the tanks and making claims really doesn't provide evidence of anything and I can see scenarios of who to do what you are claiming but not the way you claim. Getting view counts on something that is misleading is disturbing

How big is the sump associated with these "tanks" how big is the refugium" How much water is being held outside the tank and recirculated into it? When a coral extends threads to digest the coral next to it all the skimming in the world will not prevent it. Your tanks are too small to actually support the populations they show with a huge outside support system. I could grow coral In a test tube if I had a huge outside support system.

Yeah, for about 15 minutes, in most of the containers you've shown the individual polyps are too close to not kill each other, if you knew even a minimal amount about coral you would know this. The bio load on these tiny tanks is far to small for them to last more than a few weeks, in most days would be a stretch. I've been doing this for about 40 years, yes I'm made temporary displays much like you show but they are not long term habitats nor do they honestly represent what can be done with out a tremendous amount of outside resources being available. Be honest show what it really takes to maintain such a tiny environment.