The other week My lecturer for 'Environment: A Human perspective' - have a guess what it's about - was telling us the biggest crock of shit, that Geosequestration was an unrenewable source of energy.

Geosequestration was things such as using heat vents (like Iceland) and hot rocks deep underground to generate steam/similar to turn a turbine.

hmm, using volcanically regenerative sources to generate energy...very renewable you think...

apparently not! pumping water down to hot rocks to create steam apparently can cool the earth down and disrupt natural balance!

A courageous young man on the other side of the room began to argue against him, saying that you can't possible cool the earth like that. I myself can think of many points. for one, I have heard the atmosphere around earth described as roughly equivalent to the skin around an apple. if the ENTIRE atmosphere is only the skin of an apple...wht is a wee hot rock gonna be?

But as we at uni know...you control the course, you dictate the facts.

__________________
The crucifix has been replaced by the wind turbine.
- Dr Bryant Macfie
---------------------------------------------------
There is only one thing more powerful than all the armies of the world, that is an idea whose time has come.
- Victor Hugo
---------------------------------------------------
If you are on Facebook, you should join my group: "An Inconvenient Truth", Is that a euphemism for "Talking out of my arse"?
---------------------------------------------------

Someone should set afire this idiot's house and then hand him a thimble to put it out.

I must confess, i'm not familiar with geosequestrian, but he is kinda right, it may not be renewable but I also feel it won't run out of steam for another ... million years or so either. By then, who cares.

Oh wait, he sounds like an environmentalists so we should sound the alarm now before something 'catastrophic' happens. *i'm being facetious*

More like a billion years or so, might stay warm until the sun expands to destroy the Earth in 4 billion or so. We should plan now for that eventuality.

He meant non-renewable BECAUSE we may cool the inner parts of the planet by pumping water through a wee bit of it - which is of course ridiculous

__________________
The crucifix has been replaced by the wind turbine.
- Dr Bryant Macfie
---------------------------------------------------
There is only one thing more powerful than all the armies of the world, that is an idea whose time has come.
- Victor Hugo
---------------------------------------------------
If you are on Facebook, you should join my group: "An Inconvenient Truth", Is that a euphemism for "Talking out of my arse"?
---------------------------------------------------

Hmmm, so according to his argument, we can't use that as an alternative source of energy because it MIGHT cool the planet, but yet environmentalists won't let us use fossil fuels either. So what do we use ? Bad language ?

Geez, no offence craig, but the stuff they are teaching now only propagates the lies about global climate change.

I guess they find the idea of penetrating Mother Nature as offensive.

__________________
"Skepticism is the highest of duties, and blind faith the unpardonable sin." -- Thomas Huxley

That guy must get really pissed when a volcano erupts. I mean, think of all the heat that is lost that way.

He also probably has a poor understanding that the earth's core still generates heat - that the heat there isn't just what was trapped when the planet formed.

Nice to know that this guy could get a job teaching. It appears he is too stupid do do anything worthwhile.

don't worry, according to environmentalists man's green house gases are trapping all of that heat in, causing abnormal temperature increases.

its totally illogical to say we can cool the earth this way! for one, the earth is a MASSIVE entity and secondly as the water turns to steam at the insignificant depth we use for geosequestration...as the supposed 'cooling' moves inward would it not begin to dissapate with the massive temperatures and pressures within the earth!

__________________
The crucifix has been replaced by the wind turbine.
- Dr Bryant Macfie
---------------------------------------------------
There is only one thing more powerful than all the armies of the world, that is an idea whose time has come.
- Victor Hugo
---------------------------------------------------
If you are on Facebook, you should join my group: "An Inconvenient Truth", Is that a euphemism for "Talking out of my arse"?
---------------------------------------------------

did anyone in the class raise that issue ?

You don't understand the concept of "higher education." First, figure out what the instructor wants, then put his/her opinions somewhat in your own words, and give it back to him while lofting praise at how much he has taught you. If you don't follow this procedure you risk getting a poor grade.

The only "C" I got in college was in history. He was one of several teachers I challenged. Dude didn't even grade my tests. He just wrote "C" at the top of every one of them without explanation. It does happen.

But not always. One teacher threatened to fail me for plagiarism despite the fact I had footnotes (he accused me of "copying an analysis"). I met him in his office to discuss it, and I pretty much dared him to do it. He wasn't well-liked by the administration (read: openly gay man at Catholic university) and I was fully aware of it. He decided to drop the matter.

I never kissed any of their asses, even in grad school. Fortunately, most were good/great teachers, so I didn't have to. Most who didn't agree with my point of view (like a 15-minute presentation on why labor unions are worthless, for instance) just raised an eyebrow and tried to keep the class discussion short before arguments erupted.

I was primarily in business classes though, and at a private Catholic university, so I probably didn't face what a lot of other students run into these days.

__________________
"Skepticism is the highest of duties, and blind faith the unpardonable sin." -- Thomas Huxley

I got a "C" in my animal behavior class. The prof was from Toronto and complained every day about having to teach a class rather than do research. The class was pretty worthless and he spent more time flirting with the girls and talking about human psychology than what we were there for. It was my last term and I was carrying 20 units so I just wanted to get though his garbage. I usually got A's on all my papers for other classes within the department. Had more than one prof tell me they were impressed with my graphs which were multi-colored and hand drawn (this was in 1983 and 1984, I didn't own a PC). But, this Canadian prof found one "error" on my paper, using the word "data" when he felt I should use "datum." The rest of the paper was un-marked but I pretty much discussed my views rather than his in the paper which I should have known was a "no-no.". After receiving my grade I showed my brother the paper. He majored in English and Literature and he found a reference to the correct use of "Data" in a book he had that outlines correct use of the language. It clearly stated that one can use the word data to mean either a singular fact or multiple facts in a paper as long as one is consistent in its use. I copied that article and pinned it to the profs bulletin board.

All in all I kinda wish I had majored in something like math or engineering. It's kinda had to have a personal opinion that conflicts with the truth in those subjects.

in a perfect world, the prof should respect your views and base a grade on how well you back up your argument/views. Like I said, in a perfect world.

Being human, like you said, it is how well you kiss a.ss determines your grade.