placeholder

One problem with hydrogen is that it outcompetes methane (CH4) for oxygen. So while hydrogen itself isn't a greenhouse gas, by prolonging methane's life in the atmosphere it has the same effect. Hydrogen could have a future as an onsite source of heat for industrial processes. There has been huge progress made with electrolyzers that can break apart water in hydrogen and oxygen. Also, there is now white hydrogen which is hydrogen created by geological processes. Whether there's enough of it to be economically significant is another question. And again, the problem with leakage could be serious.

"The question is, where are we going to get the energy to put in?" The same source all those fossil fuels got their energy from: the sun.

What I can see is that you refuse to engage with the notion of payback. As bad as what the Northern Irish suffered, it was not even close to the same league as what Israel has done to the Palestinians since 1967. This is what happens when you oppress the locals. It's not just in Palestine that this kind of vicious and bloody payback occurs. All you have to do is consult history from the 2nd half of the 20th century onwards. Israel has become a disgrace of a democracy empowered by an increasingly bitter and bigoted majority.

History shows over and over again that regimes that subjugate native peoples, end up being retaliated against in horrible ways. This is what's happening to Israel. And the Israelis refusing to recognize the consequences of their repression doesn't make it any less true.

I've offered an explanation. All you do, as per usual is denial without actual explanation or engagment. You've got nothing.

Criticizing for someone "making it personal" is categorizing it as unfriendly comment. Are you seriously claiming that because you didn't use the words "personal attack" therefore that wasn't what your reply meant. It is to laugh. And you still are clearly avoiding the issue of an historical perspective. It's clear now, as far as that goes, that you have nothing to offer in the way of a reply.

So you meant "making it personal" as a good thing? Or is this just your way of evading the issue of considering this situation from an historical perspective?

What personal attack? Your response is clearly an appeal to emotion. Not reason. You have no rational reply to offer to an historical perspective on the situation.

Typical emotional response. History generally shows that the worse the repression of a native population, the worse the response. Call it Karma.

The worse the repression the worse the response. And I can tell you that the British govt had nothing on the Israeli govt.

Telll that to all the iinnocent civilians in the UK who were the victims of IRA violence. And, of course, the treatment of the Catholics in Northern Ireland is as nothing compared to the way Israel has treated the Palestinians in Gaza. Inevitably, the more vicious the repression, the more vicious the counter-force. The velociraptors have come home to roost.

You have a point. The Catholics in Northern Ireland weren't being nearly as badly mistreated by the Protestant-dominated Northern Ireland govt as the Palestinians were and are being mistreated by the Israel govt.

Please. At about 37:54 when he asks for the audience's vote, the boos are overwhelming.

Then all you have to do to back up your claim to to copy and paste it.

You're the one who made a claim about the link. It's up to you to provide it. As for "hyjacking the topic"... This is the topic. "Israeli Lawmaker Advocates for Global Action Against Wartime Sexual Violence" Ostensibly not about Hamas, per se. But all wartime sexual violence. At least that's what the Israeli women say that's what it's about. Are you insinuating that their concern is actually a ploy to spotlight Hamas crimes of sexual violence and that these women don't really care about sexual violence during wartime committed elsewhere? Is sexual violence during warfare only a crime if it's committed by Hamas fighters?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?535695-1/president-trump-speaks-libertarian-party-convention

I'm not going to hunt a link to a link. You provide it. As for the topic, no it's not "spotlighting the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas". You may want that to be the topic but it actually is: "Israeli Lawmaker Advocates for Global Action Against Wartime Sexual Violence"

It might actually be possible for Israel to take on this scourge right away without having to wait for the international community to take action. UN experts demand investigation into claims Israeli forces killed, raped and sexually assaulted Palestinian women and girls United Nations experts have called for an investigation into what they described as “credible allegations of egregious human rights violations” against Palestinian women and girls in Gaza and the West Bank by Israeli forces. The allegations include extrajudicial killing, arbitrary detention, degrading treatment, rape and sexual violence, according to a statement by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights released on Monday. It did not detail how they did their fact-finding, but they referred to photos of female detainees in degrading circumstances reportedly taken by Israeli troops and uploaded online. https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/20/middleeast/israel-hamas-un-investigation-sexual-abuse-intl/index.html

400 to 1,100% Increase The U.S. Southeast Atlantic and Gulf Coast regions saw an increase of over 400 to 1,100 percent, respectively, in high tide flooding days compared to the year 2000. https://coast.noaa.gov/states/fast-facts/recurrent-tidal-flooding.html

I can't remember a time when climate change denialists such as yourself gave any evidence that the understood the difference between climate and weather.

I've seen lots of clueless examples posted on aseannow.com. But citing Poland as an example, a country with a centuries long tradition of anti-semitism? Bizarre.

I can see it's really difficult for some people to wrap their minds around the plain English of Hanugama's claim that Hamas was stealing most of the food aid. No evidence, just assertions. And even on commonsense grounds your claims fail. There are about 2 million people in Gaza. Why would Hamas be stealing most of the food to feed its fighters who were reckoned to number 30,000 before the war. Even with the strangulated quantity that Israel allows into Gaza, that doesn't literally add up. . I remember well the "it stands to reason" arguments like yours were made to justify invading Iraq.

And yet you offer nothing yourself to support this statement from Hanaguma: "Given that the majority of relief supplies are stolen by Hamas, perhaps you are pointing your finger in the wrong direction." Put up or...

As I've pointed out, it's common for judges who dissent in whole in whole or in part from a decision to explain their differences with the majority. 4 judges out of 15 disagreed wholly or in part with the decision. They are speaking for themselves. Not for the other 11 judges.

Oh, he's a lawyer. I guess that means he's impartial and fair-minded? It's a good thing that lawyers don't try to make their case by slanting evidence. At least, that's the case in oppositeworld. What don't you understand that out of 15 justices, 4 had a problem of some sort with the ruling? And 2 of those disagreed with the ruling in its entirety.