Earth's Oxygen levels were way lower in the past. 2.5 billion years ago there was no oxygen on the planet. So if we suddenly lost all O2 in the atmosphere it would be ok because O2 levels would only be returning to "normal". /s
@@kmoses582 Indeed. The fauna and flora of the Mesozoic, for example, lived with higher CO2 content in the atmosphere. They also lived on a planet who's sea level was over 60 meters higher than they are today. There is one thing biologists seemed to fail to communicate to you though: The fauna and flora off the Mesozoic is quite different of what we have in the late Cenozoic. This may be the thing you are failing to grasp here.
@@nunofoo8620 Life was different, I got that. My problem is that you guys just look at CO2 and nothing else. I am sure that CO2 had an influence on the climate of the time, maybe even melted some ice. However you seemed to ignore that the land was in one continent. That is a huge influence on climate and ice formation. I am sure there are other impacts also.
Why cant we line the sides of roads with native plants and trees. Why not use thirsty cement in are roads to reduce flooding and sand mining helping ecosystems and the people.
Tax the fossil fuel criminals into deploying 'artificial ozone holes' in the atmosphere, with each filled by solar panel arrays, that also eject their fossil-farts. Elon can give them a ride up, to balance off their catastrophic 'downs'.
Renewable Energy and Regenerative Agriculture can work together sharing the same footprint to produce clean energy and sequester CO2 in the soil. Agrivoltaics is growing fast and has the potential to be a catalyst for a broader agricultural revolution. We can integrate many more layers of symbiotic industries into our farmlands while restoring the ecology of the land. I'm very optimistic for biochar. Growing biomass regeneratively and then using electric ovens known as pyrolizers to convert the biomass to biochar would sequester CO2 at two points in the supply chain. Biochar can be used as a soil amendment, but it can also be used as a feedstock for carbon based materials like industrial diamonds, graphite for batteries and other electrical equipment or electric arc furnaces, and biochar can be used to make graphene. The potential exists to use anerobic digestors to convert biomass to biogas and a solid digestate byproduct that can be used to make biochar or compost. Biogas could be used in existing natural gas power plants with carbon capture technology to actually make the carbon neutral fuel carbon negative. Hydrogen is growing fast and can play a role in a transition away from fossil fuels in almost every application. Many electrochemical processes can act as flexible loads to help balance the grid to reduce the amount of energy storage needed. All of the solutions for climate change exist, but it requires a lot of work to build. It's also possible to make methane from the CO2 in the air. Space X plans to do this on Mars to produce rocket fuel. There are companies doing this now to produce E-Fuels. If we pair an E Fuel with carbon capture we are actively removing CO2. We need to remove an amount of CO2 that is close to the amount of Oil that is shipped around the world every day. Gigatons of CO2 in enormous quantities are required to be removed to meet IPCC guidelines to prevent 3 degrees of warming. The melting permafrost is not likely to stop so what we must aim for is giving ourselves the choice to influence the climate at some point in the future. Many other strategies can be deployed to combat global warming as we solve the emissions and sequestration challenges. It appears clear that a significant amount of warming and sea level rise is unavoidable but perhaps we can prevent a full melting of the icecaps and the 200+ foot rise in sea level. As ludicrous as this may sound, if we achieve abundant clean energy, we could do stuff like build massive snow machines to blow a cover of snow over permafrost and to build up the snowpack on receding glaciers.
Growing trees actually store carbon in themselves and 'breath out' Oxygen. Some ecosystem processes do produce carbon dioxide, such as decay processes, but these had been in steady balance for nearly a million years. The only new type of source of carbon dioxide in this time period is industrial activity, which also happens to coincide with the uptick in atmospheric co2 levels above 300 ppm.
just needs massive change. you fellow human have been effected by cancel culture. you do not have to go in the cave to fix your problems you fix it. I think in 5 years the world will be very different with our efforts.
'Yes', a species can change it's environment, and 'yes' even in negative ways at times, but nature is going to do what nature does and does not care about us or our agendas.
Besides CO2 in the atmosphere: Consider the following: Electromagnetism ('em') in various energy frequencies. Modern science also claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy, quarks and electrons being considered charged particles, each with their respective magnetic field with them. Electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism, varying possibly only in energy density and energy frequency. As the human species have been dumping 'em' into the atmosphere, at times all the way to outer space and back, that 'em' agitates atoms and molecules in the atmosphere. Agitated atoms and molecules are considered 'heat'. While many people have heard about CO2 contributing to climate change, how many people have heard about 'em' contributing to climate change? Anybody willing to give up all your 'em' driven devices? Probably not many. Expect climate to change, in part due to the human species, and not only from greenhouse gases being put into the atmosphere.
And besides CO2 and 'em': The Earth's magnetic field continues to weaken, currently projected to be at it's weakest around 2035. The Earth's magnetic poles are also moving. The Earth's magnetic poles are most probably going to flip again, as has occurred numerous times in Earth's history. These changes will also affect the climate and species here upon this Earth.
Wow! This is amazing! Seriously man, you deserve an award or something. I don't think I have ever seen someone use so many scientific words, and yet so obviously have no understanding of how any of it actually functions. Bravo 👏
@@reaperdragon1 WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS): GRAVITY: (copy and paste from my files): Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way. a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.) (And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.) (An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward. * And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................) But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions. ** Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be? So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true? But also: Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides? (Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
@@reaperdragon1 NUMBERS: (copy and paste from my files): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.). And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well. * While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'. Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time? Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's). Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'. * Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.
@@yvonneplant9434 Your statement is ignorant, Venus get twice the energy from the sun, the atmosphere is about 93x more dense then Earth's and has about 200,000x the CO2 then Earth.
If, as a carbon-based lifeform, you feel carbon is detrimental, please feel free to remove yourself from the equation.
Propaganda for pseudo-science.
The idiots are out here I see
Thank you for actually doing a full segment on the most important topic we have to deal with. Keep them coming!!
🤣😂🤣😂🤣…..Its Called DARPA!
Earth has had much higher CO2 in the past
Earth's Oxygen levels were way lower in the past. 2.5 billion years ago there was no oxygen on the planet. So if we suddenly lost all O2 in the atmosphere it would be ok because O2 levels would only be returning to "normal".
/s
@@nunofoo8620 Except for the fact that life did just fine at those higher levels.
@@kmoses582 Indeed. The fauna and flora of the Mesozoic, for example, lived with higher CO2 content in the atmosphere. They also lived on a planet who's sea level was over 60 meters higher than they are today. There is one thing biologists seemed to fail to communicate to you though: The fauna and flora off the Mesozoic is quite different of what we have in the late Cenozoic. This may be the thing you are failing to grasp here.
@@nunofoo8620 Life was different, I got that. My problem is that you guys just look at CO2 and nothing else. I am sure that CO2 had an influence on the climate of the time, maybe even melted some ice. However you seemed to ignore that the land was in one continent. That is a huge influence on climate and ice formation. I am sure there are other impacts also.
@@nunofoo8620 no they were higher..... its why the animals were able to get so big.
Excellent video! Look forward to more of them!
You love getting brainwashed
I may have to take a trip to your planet Earth 🌍 ...it has always looked interesting 🤔...
Why cant we line the sides of roads with native plants and trees.
Why not use thirsty cement in are roads to reduce flooding and sand mining helping ecosystems and the people.
Everything's a delicate balance, tamper with it and there's a price to pay
So why are they eco engineering?
@@PrezCamacho Begging the Question logical fallacy.
What's the issue with WUSA TV this evening-no conection???
We love and respect for work u guy do from new York Bronx =Creston family 184 by Los Verdes LLC ..◇
Bogus
Tax the fossil fuel criminals into deploying 'artificial ozone holes' in the atmosphere, with each filled by solar panel arrays, that also eject their fossil-farts. Elon can give them a ride up, to balance off their catastrophic 'downs'.
Sooooo you don’t use fossil fuels?
Renewable Energy and Regenerative Agriculture can work together sharing the same footprint to produce clean energy and sequester CO2 in the soil. Agrivoltaics is growing fast and has the potential to be a catalyst for a broader agricultural revolution. We can integrate many more layers of symbiotic industries into our farmlands while restoring the ecology of the land. I'm very optimistic for biochar. Growing biomass regeneratively and then using electric ovens known as pyrolizers to convert the biomass to biochar would sequester CO2 at two points in the supply chain. Biochar can be used as a soil amendment, but it can also be used as a feedstock for carbon based materials like industrial diamonds, graphite for batteries and other electrical equipment or electric arc furnaces, and biochar can be used to make graphene. The potential exists to use anerobic digestors to convert biomass to biogas and a solid digestate byproduct that can be used to make biochar or compost. Biogas could be used in existing natural gas power plants with carbon capture technology to actually make the carbon neutral fuel carbon negative. Hydrogen is growing fast and can play a role in a transition away from fossil fuels in almost every application. Many electrochemical processes can act as flexible loads to help balance the grid to reduce the amount of energy storage needed. All of the solutions for climate change exist, but it requires a lot of work to build. It's also possible to make methane from the CO2 in the air. Space X plans to do this on Mars to produce rocket fuel. There are companies doing this now to produce E-Fuels. If we pair an E Fuel with carbon capture we are actively removing CO2. We need to remove an amount of CO2 that is close to the amount of Oil that is shipped around the world every day. Gigatons of CO2 in enormous quantities are required to be removed to meet IPCC guidelines to prevent 3 degrees of warming. The melting permafrost is not likely to stop so what we must aim for is giving ourselves the choice to influence the climate at some point in the future. Many other strategies can be deployed to combat global warming as we solve the emissions and sequestration challenges. It appears clear that a significant amount of warming and sea level rise is unavoidable but perhaps we can prevent a full melting of the icecaps and the 200+ foot rise in sea level. As ludicrous as this may sound, if we achieve abundant clean energy, we could do stuff like build massive snow machines to blow a cover of snow over permafrost and to build up the snowpack on receding glaciers.
So when are we cutting down the rain forest because it produces too much carbon emissions...
Growing trees actually store carbon in themselves and 'breath out' Oxygen. Some ecosystem processes do produce carbon dioxide, such as decay processes, but these had been in steady balance for nearly a million years. The only new type of source of carbon dioxide in this time period is industrial activity, which also happens to coincide with the uptick in atmospheric co2 levels above 300 ppm.
The only way to fix this is to increase taxes!
We have a lot more to worry about than carbon dioxide 🤮😤🤮😤🤮😤
Nope.. finish school
@@denisdaly1708 I am 69 and did graduate with honors . Read your bible and listen to podcasts that inform u and grow up baby
What should we be worrying about?
7:50 Has his tooth overshot its growth ceiling due to high level of CO2?
Nice story bro
Ban airplanes
just needs massive change. you fellow human have been effected by cancel culture. you do not have to go in the cave to fix your problems you fix it. I think in 5 years the world will be very different with our efforts.
lol Invisible indeed
'Yes', a species can change it's environment, and 'yes' even in negative ways at times, but nature is going to do what nature does and does not care about us or our agendas.
Besides CO2 in the atmosphere:
Consider the following: Electromagnetism ('em') in various energy frequencies. Modern science also claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy, quarks and electrons being considered charged particles, each with their respective magnetic field with them.
Electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism, varying possibly only in energy density and energy frequency.
As the human species have been dumping 'em' into the atmosphere, at times all the way to outer space and back, that 'em' agitates atoms and molecules in the atmosphere. Agitated atoms and molecules are considered 'heat'.
While many people have heard about CO2 contributing to climate change, how many people have heard about 'em' contributing to climate change?
Anybody willing to give up all your 'em' driven devices? Probably not many.
Expect climate to change, in part due to the human species, and not only from greenhouse gases being put into the atmosphere.
And besides CO2 and 'em':
The Earth's magnetic field continues to weaken, currently projected to be at it's weakest around 2035. The Earth's magnetic poles are also moving. The Earth's magnetic poles are most probably going to flip again, as has occurred numerous times in Earth's history. These changes will also affect the climate and species here upon this Earth.
Wow! This is amazing! Seriously man, you deserve an award or something. I don't think I have ever seen someone use so many scientific words, and yet so obviously have no understanding of how any of it actually functions. Bravo 👏
@@reaperdragon1 WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
GRAVITY: (copy and paste from my files):
Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way.
a. Imagine a 12 hour clock.
b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions.
c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions.
(The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.)
d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields.
e. Do this with the em fields on and off.
(The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects.
(Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.)
(And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.)
(An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.)
'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done.
'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world.
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
** Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
But also:
Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
@@reaperdragon1 NUMBERS: (copy and paste from my files):
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows:
Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction.
Then:
1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe.
(And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.).
And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.
* While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'.
Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time?
Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's).
Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
* Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.
Its Called DARPA!
Fear mongering
Your username says it all. Your comments will always be ignored.
So typical that you don't care about other people on this world even people you are related to.
Venus is our future if we can't find a way to fix this in enough time.
@@yvonneplant9434 I'm going to Uranus 😁
@@yvonneplant9434 Your statement is ignorant, Venus get twice the energy from the sun, the atmosphere is about 93x more dense then Earth's and has about 200,000x the CO2 then Earth.