Jon Stewart, Richard Branson, and the future

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Punkwaffle, Nov 10, 2004.

  1. Punkwaffle macrumors regular

    Punkwaffle

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2004
    #1
    Did anyone catch the Daily Show last night when Richard Branson was on. I cannot believe that this got such little media attention.
    For those who missed it:
    Jon was interviewing Branson, pretty standard stuff. Then Jon Stewart asked if Branson would consider sponsoring a competition amongst scientists and inventors to find a non-oil consuming replacement for the internal combustion engine. The winner would get billions of dollars in funding. If this could be achieved, the ramifications are endless, politically, sociollogically, environmentally, and so on. The current administration has no interest in pursuing this as it would jeapoardize there relationship with the Saudi's and their drive for a Iraqi puppet-state.
    Anyway, by the end of the interview, it sounded as if Branson agreed to organize this competition. Could be the start of something REALLY BIG!

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
  3. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #3
    John Galt is the hero in the Ayn Rand book Atlas Shrugged who created a perpetual motion machine.

    The first line of the book is Who is John Galt? and is a cultural catchword.

    You asked for thoughts ;)
    The idea of a non-fossil fuel engine, the Branson swagger and an uresponsive societal machine seemed to remind me of this. :rolleyes:

    Maybe others have different thoughts.
     
  4. gwuMACaddict macrumors 68040

    gwuMACaddict

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    washington dc
    #4

    my thoughts are that you're going to get this moved to political discussion with loaded statements like that.
     
  5. apple2991 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    #5
    Loaded? That isn't meant to provoke anybody. There is a difference between loading something up and stating obvious fact. I'll give you two guesses which one his statement about Bush/Saudis is.

    (Hint: It's obvious fact.)
     
  6. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #6
    I think the original idea of the post was to provoke discussion about the "a non-oil consuming replacement for the internal combustion engine" and not politics.

    I hope that is the spirit of the discussion (if it ever takes off).
     
  7. maxterpiece macrumors 6502a

    maxterpiece

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    #7
    It's a stated fact- in the books. America knows that Bush and the Saudi's are connected. Money shows this. But it's okay. Out of sight out of mind. We voted for Bush so that he would continue keeping the dirty stuff hidden under the table. He keeps it simple for us - good vs. evil. I'm satisfied with that. A person may like to think about the complications of the world but people as a whole sure don't. Good vs. Evil and i thank Bush for being so happy to give me the story I need to just live my life. I think it is perfectly acceptable to endorse this administration and be happy that they keep the dirt under the table for us.

    As far as the contest for non-combustion alternatives - that won't ever happen until it's forced. As the Chinese middle class grows (and believe me it is growing very fast), a lot more people will have cars and a lot more oil will be consumed. There will come a point where people just won't be able to afford oil anymore and we will have to look at alternatives. Bush is working hard to protect our oil interests in the middle east, but it's not too long before our environment and just the dearth of oil resources left in the world make the combustion engine way to expensive to hold on to. It is then that Americans will open there minds to alternatives. Right now gas is too cheap for anyone to give a crap - no amount of research or $ will change that.
     
  8. gwuMACaddict macrumors 68040

    gwuMACaddict

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    washington dc
    #8
    maybe i'm way out in left field here, but that seems awfully political to me. i'm not trying to stifle discussion, i just think there are other ways to encourage it. bush/saudis have nothing to do with that the original post was about. the original post was about non-oil consuming engines. why not just say that? i think thats the kind of insinuation that upsets a lot of members.

    as for the engine/bronson, i think it's an exciting idea.
     
  9. gwuMACaddict macrumors 68040

    gwuMACaddict

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    washington dc
    #9
    pretty sure thats not why most people voted for bush... man, can't keep anything from getting political anymore... :rolleyes:
     
  10. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #10
    OK, trying to get back on track here...

    The original post was about a contest for "a non-oil consuming replacement for the internal combustion engine".

    There was the well publicized contest for a private spaceship.
    Private spaceship team picks up $10 million

    And Branson has been involved in that...

    Sooooo, why not a contest for a "a non-oil consuming replacement for the internal combustion engine"?

    My money is on John Galt :p
     
  11. apple2991 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    #11
    Yeah, who needs information anyway? I know I don't want to know the whole truth about why Americans are being murdered, just as long as it's "out of sight, out of mind."

    Who wants to know who America kills or for what reason, in your name and mine , thus never giving people the opportunity to force their government to be socially responsible to its citizens? I know I don't want, like, freedom and stuff.
     
  12. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #12
    this is definately starting to get too political, lets try and get back on track here!

    anyways, i think just like the X-prize has a way of pushing space travel in new directions i think that a contest for a oil-less car would help push that market

    however, i see not the problem with the governmet so much as a problem with the car companies, who have probably already developed this technology, patened it and are just quietly holding on to it until they need to use it over oil. They are the ones who want to keep gas and oil around too, they want to keep the craptastic engines that we have so we have to buy new cars evey ten years at least ect.

    i do think we need to start Now to find an alternative, the problems with oil and fuel effecency are starting to hurt everyone, we need a way to solve this, but waiting until the issue is out of contorl will only cause chaos
     
  13. maxterpiece macrumors 6502a

    maxterpiece

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    #13
    As I said, individuals may want to understand the complexity of the world, but people as a whole do not. How else do you explain the explicitly obvious evidence that Bush blatantly lies about Iraq every day? People really do not want to know.

    It may not be their stated reason but it is the reason. There is no other reason. Bush creates fake issues like gay marriage - creates an excuse for americans to ignore facts and they embrace it. That is hard proof. Look at the statistics - people valued "moral issues" as the #1 issue that affected their decision on who to vote for. As far as I know, people in America have to right to make their own decisions about what is moral and what is not... as long as it doesn't hurt other people. These are excuses. But I can't blame people. Politicians are intrinsically selfish - why get yourself involved in what is "right" in politics when there is no way to achieve that end.
     
  14. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #14
    Oh boy...
    No salvaging this one boys. The politics have taken over.

    Too bad, could have been a fun discussion.
     
  15. apple2991 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    #15
    I'm not questioning that statement, I'm questioning your defense of those people and the defense of an administration who deems it fit to lie about SO MANY things. All governments lie, what matters most is how/about what. And if we don't have a government who "sweeps things under tha mat" (lies), what's going to happen? Oh, I don't know, people might actually be faced with information and thus become motivated to get involved in their lives and in their country. People aren't going to get riled up if they feel there is nothing to get riled up about.

    And just because people don't "want" to know about the world doesn't mean that's all fine and dandy, and let's have a government who takes advantage of that fact so explicitly. This is how the world is, if they can't handle that, screw em. Don't tell them it's OK, you don't need to care about people dying and being murdered because they're not in your general vicinity. We'd all like to live in a fantasy world. Unfortunately, that is stupid, irresponsible, and quite immoral.
     
  16. apple2991 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    #16
    What more would you expect from it? There isn't much to say.

    Would it be great to have an automated vehicle that doesn't pollute and/or depend on fossil fuels for operation? Of course.

    Are the oil and automated vehicle industries inextricably linked to politics? Of course.

    Drive Through.
     
  17. maxterpiece macrumors 6502a

    maxterpiece

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    #17
    My attitude is simple. You are right that it is wrong. However, people DID vote for Bush despite the fact that his policies are manipulative and evil. It's fine to say that it is wrong, but unless you can explain how the majority of America is going to realize and accept this, I don't think there's any utility in discussing it. it's fine for you to get upset about it, but does that accomplish anything? Politics are so deeply intwined with corruption and greed that, to most of America they aren't worth the effort. I mean you can say that Kerry probably would have reversed a lot of the horrible, isolationist and fascist policies that Bush has used, but he isn't going to fix any of the problems in the system because he is part of it.

    The problems with american democracy are part of so many different elements of our society that it seems pretty hopeless. I mean if a president can twist something like September 11 - an attack on our country - into something that will motivate the public to support MORE oppression of non - americans, and less freedoms, then what hope is there that the truth will ever be widely acknowledged. I am of the opinion that things will and have to get a lot worse before they can get better. People have to feel this even more personally. A lot more people have to die before Americans are willing to give up their cowboy, screw the facts, bullying tactics. And it's going to take some serious rebelling. It will be on a larger scale than Vietnam because America is even more powerful now than they were then. Furthermore, we are seeing other countries develop like china and india and they have a lot more people over there than we do. The paradigm is shifting and just like someone who has been a bully for 50 years won't go down without a fight, America is not going to change without getting a lot more than a black eye.

    So my opinion is stop postponing the inevitable. Let's keep Bush in power and get this over with.
     
  18. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #18
    There has been an alternative for over 100 years.

    The Diesel Engine originally ran on refined peanut oil and was supposed to be a very cheap source of energy for the workers of the world. The history behind the guy is fascinating.

    Biodiesel is beginning to make headway. The anti-alternative fuel pundits have denounced this as being dangerous and bad for diesel engines. But considering that Rudolph Diesel originally intended them to run on biodiesel, that is a load of poop.

    Hemp is also an incredibly versatile plant that can be made into a replacement for anything that is currently made out of petroleum products today.


    Industrial Hemp
    An explanation of how Hemp Fuel works
    Some history concerning the plant
    Popular Mechanics called Hemp the next Billion Dollar crop, in 1938.

    A perpetual motion engine is not likely any time soon. But there are and have been alternatives out there.

    Someone is likely to point out that burning hemp still adds Co2 to the atmosphere. It does but not in the same way that fossil fuel does. First you have to grow the hemp, which takes Co2 out, then the same amount is released. By burning Fossil Fuel, you are taking Co2 which had been buried and are adding it to the atmosphere. One is sustainable and offers no net change, the other pollutes, is non renewable and adds considerable amounts to the atmosphere.

    Plus, it's really really cheap, and we can grow it right here.

    That would destroy the energy industry cartel, oh well.
     
  19. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #19
    That's what I call an alternative fuel.

    You can also use it to pass the time while waiting for the biomechanic to show up... :D
     
  20. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #20
    Lol, yeah there is that. But there are strains of Hemp that are THC free as well. The history behind Hemp being outlawed is interesting, interesting in the fact that DuPont is connected to it in so many different ways.

    There are a variety of other countries working to develop that technology right now, the lowered cost of production that would come with a cheap and highly reliable energy source would give them a major advantage. Hopefully China doesn't catch on.
     
  21. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #21
    It sounds too much like the Keanue Reeves film about an different energy source.
     
  22. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #22
    Research it, then judge it. This stuff goes on all the time, there are people who are that greedy.

    *Cough* M$ *Cough* Did they get to be the biggest by offering the best OS? *Hack* *Wheeze*
     
  23. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #23
    Not forgetting William Randolph Hearst, of course, whose timber was ready to pulp into newsprint but for the obvious advantages of hemp paper. And which press baron's papers instigated the "Reefer Madness" rubbish, I wonder?
     
  24. zelmo macrumors 603

    zelmo

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Mac since 7.5
    #24
    Just some selfish dude who lives in a weird house designed by some guy name of Howard Roark or something... ;)
     
  25. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #25
    Hearst had invested heavily in the wrong product. If Hemp had been allowed to be used for paper, Hearst would have lost $800 million (approx.) which was a lot of money in those days. It's still a lot, but that would be billions in todays terms. Dupont had made the same investments in finding ways to make products out of oil that could have been made from hemp.

    The ensuing propaganda has been very effective, hardly anybody knows about this alternative.
     

Share This Page