OT: Hydrogen fuel cell for cars..

There are ten unpersuaded climatologists in the top 300. The ones I know ab out don't have rational doubts. There are a couple of elderly modellers who don't think that the modern models pay proper attention to the issues that they discovered, one - Lindzen - who won't agree with his colleagues on pr inciple, and two - Christry and Spencer - who are born again Christians.

Most of them aren't actually deniers, but the denial business sets them up to look as if they are, but publicising those of their statements that look denialist when taken out of context.

The denialist propaganda machine is a political device, paid for by the fos sil carbon extraction industry, with the political target of lobbying for n o or minimal restrictions on the extraction of fossil carbon for sale as fu el.

The industry doesn't care that it's degrading the planet in the long term, and it does care that any program to slow that degradation would impair it' s cash flow.

That the politics. It hasn't made any dent in the science because the scien ce is rock solid.

Your confusion on this point is evidence that the money spent of denialist propaganda has fooled enough of the (more gullible) people, enough of the t ime.

It's what you get when people with money get busy undermining scientific re sults that would leave them with less money if the results were taken serio usly.

Not 'people', just one professor who has reportedly violated disclosure rules of some publishers (and there's some ethical implications there).

No, doubts about models aren't 'denial'. Deniers are not the folk who look at, and criticize, and find ways to improve, models. They're the folk who insist that we should act as if opinion statements that are not backed by a credible model or data are just as good as science. Look, the priestess can sacrifice a chicken, and tell us the sooth by examining the entrails!

So, are the Moon landing photos real then?

I have downloaded some *really* high resolution entrails.

How deep did John Cameron dive? Some pretty cool/strange critters down there in that pressurized liquid environment.

Idiot! Cyanobacteria, BY DEFINITION does not work CONSUMING oxygen.

also know as blue-green algae, do practice photosynthesis. Some of them get energy capture rates of up to 8% under laboratory conditions. This isn't all that rotten, but there's a big gap between getting that in the laboratory and setting up industrial-scale plant.

See figure 5.4.

Since you still haven't told us what "do not work that way" means to you, you still come over as an uncomprehending enthusiast for snappy - if meaningless - one-liners.

I never suggested that cyanobacteria consume oxygen, and I can't imagine why you might think that I did. In the dark, they may well consume oxygen, if out of range of any other energy source.

It came from the big bang, this is possibly not what you meant.

yeah it's not practiacl in the short term, Toyota knows that. and in the medium term the patents have expired before it becomes practical.

Other than the insane abounts of money involved, I can't think of a thing.

LOL. You might be on to something there.

Really? How much money is amdx making on LENR? It's not the con artists that are the crazies. It's the people like amdx who keep looking for how it can work when it can't.

I think he has confused the name cyanobacteria with some haloarchaea which use a type of photosynthesis to move hydrogen ions across the cell wall with bacteriorhodopsin. There is a fair amount of research in the area for producing hydrogen as well as producing electrical current.