h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

" They're the future, not the present. The present requires oil. The Western way of life depends utterly on oil."

Haven't you ever wondered why? Hydrogen is not "future", It's just badly funded and would hurt a lot of oil people (like the US administration). Dismissing it as "future" is just lazy. Personally I can't remember the last time I saw a train that wasn't eletric.

Tidal power? Most of the power in my country comes from hydro power dams, a few gas feilds and a geothermal plant.

"...Haven't you ever wondered why? ..." It doesn't matter why. It's not lazy to dismiss hydrogen to the future. It's not workable *now*. There's no infrastructure *now*. The issues of safe storage have not been solved as of *now*. Fuel cell technology is not economic *now*.

I wish it were. Truly I do. A new engine has been unveiled this week which could power ships via steam. I truly hope it reaches the mass market and realises it's potential. But as of *now* it's just a potential.

These are facts, App, and it's not lazy to recognise things as they are rather than how we would all wish them to be. (And how perhaps they should be if previous governments had been more forward thinking )

"Zagreb, this is a statement, with an ambiguous meaning - are you sure you meant to put it that way? First, you say that oil barons don't vote and then say that voting doesn't matter anyway! (We all know that anyway, it's just interesting to hear you admit it.)"

I didn't say the Oil Barons don't vote, I meant they control the popular vote. When did I say voting didn't matter? I never said that or even implied it.

"I meant they control the popular vote"

should have said "I meant they don't control the popular vote".

"You're sounding like Bush Starbirth: faith-based evidence. If you *believe* he has it, then he has it! If he has wmd, then provide proof: get of you ass and do some work investigating and at the end make sure you have something more then hot air."

Fair point, but then we've had people here *inisting* the war is purely about oil, *insisting* it was planned way before 9/11, some even claiming that 9/11 was orchestrated by the CIA - all of this without any sort of proof. All of us have our beliefs and prejudices.

"Haven't you ever wondered why? Hydrogen is not "future", It's just badly funded and would hurt a lot of oil people (like the US administration). Dismissing it as "future" is just lazy. Personally I can't remember the last time I saw a train that wasn't eletric."

Oil is the past of fuel, hydrogen is undoubtably the future. If there was a major energy crisis, the oil companies would be shown the door and hydrogen would take over and then we'd have "Big Hydrogen"

Incidentally, you can run your car on alcohol.

"It's not workable *now*." - care to expand Geo?

There's no infrastructure *now*. - That's not difficult

"The issues of safe storage have not been solved as of *now*." It's not *that* dangerous and not that easy to ignite and dissipates extreemly quickly.

"Fuel cell technology is not economic *now*." - care to expand?

" A new engine has been unveiled this week which could power ships via steam." did you know that the initial power that gets an airliner off the ground is steam? It's nothing new.

I looks like I'm picking on you, but, If you're going to make claims then provide some substance.

"Incidentally, you can run your car on alcohol."

That's the thing Zagreb - the only real change with fuels is delivery and maybe the combustion chamber.

Zagreb, you believe what you want to believe, that's obvious, so I am assuming that you find Robert Fisk as 'unreliable' as you'd find Chomsky and Pilger! Nevertheless, I was interested to read in an article by Fisk, that a 'group of conservatives' sent a letter to Clinton in 1997, urging 'regime change' back then. Clinton wisely told them to go emulate Marvin the Paranoid Android, and go soak their heads. Imagine my starry eyed surprise, to find this same letter mentioned in a mainstream paper just days later! So, yes, I think this war may well have been planned *long* before Sept 11th.
BTW, Zagreb, I hope you're not trying to claim that you honestly believe that Saddam Hussein has *anything* to do with Al Quaeda or 911? I don't care what percentage of Americans *now* believe that, it doesn't make it true!

"Clinton wisely told them to go emulate Marvin the Paranoid Android"

Presumbably before he insitigated his own plan to have Hussein assassinated before realising that a previous President had made it illegal.

I'm not 100% convinced on the Saddam/Al-Quaida thing but it's fairly likely. Saddam is a turncoat who has changed from secular tyrant and friend of the West in the 1980s to brother-muslim and enemy of America in the 1990s. I wouldn't put it past him to support al-Quaida. He certainly has no good relations with the US to ruin.

"That's the thing Zagreb - the only real change with fuels is delivery and maybe the combustion chamber."

Not even that. There was a story on UK news recently saying people were buying cheap booze to power their cars. The police simply said "this is illegal as tax has not been paid on this". Nothing about it ruining your car or not working - the first things they'd focus on if they wanted to discourage it.

Reminds me of when I was at school. We once got a science lecture explaining that you could power a house on the gases from household waste. My "why don't we do that, then?" was met with "I don't know".

"I'm not 100% convinced on the Saddam/Al-Quaida thing but it's fairly likely." - based on?

"to brother-muslim" based on?

"enemy of America" since when has that defined bad? (starbirth and tac will probably have a feild day making up interpertations from that)

'hangs head and cries bitterly'.Zagreb, I honestly wish I thought you were joking. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are *well known* to hate each other with a purple passion! But I am tempted to say, that your head is so stuffed full of what has been called 'Yankee propaganda', that there's no room for inconvenient fact!

"was met with "I don't know". I remember a lot of those from highschool science.

Remember, cattle farts are methane and if you don't do something with it then it's bad for the ozone layer.

"that your head is so stuffed full of what has been called 'Yankee propaganda', that there's no room for inconvenient fact!"

If that's what you think informs my opinions, then fine.

"I'm not 100% convinced on the Saddam/Al-Quaida thing but it's fairly likely." - based on?

Saddam is unpredictable and very anti-American. There were ever rumours he was helping out Milosevich following the NATO war against Yugoslavia. It's not unreasonable he'd try and get on over on America. Terrorism is the best way to do that.

""to brother-muslim" based on?"

The 1991 Gulf War. Suddenly, Saddam was shown at prayer and called for a "Holy War". In the 1980s, he apparently wasn't even religious. Recent murals show him on horseback, riding beside a giant green flag (the colour of Islam). He's jumped on the "Muslim believer" bandwagon, all right.

""enemy of America" since when has that defined bad?"

Depends in what circumstances. Currently, Saddam's regime is worse than the United States, so I think that makes him the bad guy.

"Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are *well known* to hate each other with a purple passion!"

But would they refuse his help and more importantly equipment? Remember, revolutionary Iran hated the USSR and Communism, but they were quite happy to accept Soviet arms and equipment when it was clear that no-one else would supply them. Whilst publicly loathing the USSR, of course. Don't suppose bin Laden wouldn't take arms or even Chemical Weapons from Saddam. He'd justify it to himself somehow and Saddam would most probably just be happy with revenge.

"Saddam is unpredictable and very anti-American." - again I don't see the universal badness.

However I do see a problem with this phrase "anti-American". If that means so much to someone who is not american, then that person has esteem issues.

"Don't suppose bin Laden wouldn't take arms or even Chemical Weapons from Saddam." He would have to have them to sell

If america gets accused of anything there are shouts of 'where's the proof' (you included Zagreb)

However, when america accuses anyone else it become a case of 'prove you're not guilty'

Excellent point, Apparition. That's why this war has a sick feeling of inevitability about it...The latest date I heard is mid-February!