1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

I Love Michael Gove

Discussion in 'Education news' started by dunnocks, Jul 26, 2017.

  1. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    no mobile phone upgrades!
    needabreak likes this.
  2. Moony

    Moony Lead commenter

    Mentioning that something is not guaranteed to increase the success of a thing is not the same as saying that it's not a respectable attempt.

    And as for your science qualifications I did not know that you had those. I do now. We are talking about something science related and you seemed to not grasp the points we were raising so I was just pointing out that we have science credentials.

    Neither of us have said it could not happen, just that it's incredibly unlikely at the moment, and as I said it may well take some sort of paradigm shifting discovery. What is so difficult to understand about that? Given that you are the one making value judgements about who is better at science surely you with your much better knowledge could understand that.

    But anyway, since you've flagged that you yourself are a scientifically minded person how about you provide some evidence of your claim that we'll get there 'soon'? Maybe something to support the fact that since 'plants extract hydrogen' we could do it easily. Please feel free to cite any paper that you want, I can access them even if there's a paywall.
    EmanuelShadrack likes this.
  3. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    if it was "easy" we would have done it a long time ago! But I do think it will happen soon.

    Although that just comes from being convinced by the people I've met in the research group, and their demonstrations and catalysts, etc.

    If you'd met them, you might believe them too!
  4. Moony

    Moony Lead commenter

    Wonderful, so because you've a demo and are convinced. And you now want me to take your opinion as being solid and incontestable because you've seen a demo that I've not and you've stolen to the people and I haven't. You do know that science doesn't work like that. If they're able to do demos of their work then there must be some papers available, you've been asked for some references and are failing to provide them at the moment. You've not even indicated if you are able to find some but need some time to look!

    So to summarise, citation (still) needed.
    EmanuelShadrack likes this.
  5. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    you do know human conversations DO work like that! I've studied the science, I've met the scientists, I've listened to the lectures, seen the demo's read the research,

    I've explained to you in simple terms how it works, it is very easy to understand,

    For goodness sake, grow up, it is hardly a new idea, it is hardly novel, there are so many groups who have been working on this for so long in so many countries,

    Find your own citation!

    If you are interested at all, look into it yourself, I've told you what my link is to this group, find them, or find any one of the many many others, and find out where this line of research is at.It is one of the most exciting areas of modern progress

    I'm here because I enjoy the chat, i am not obliged to provide you or anyone else with "citations". If you want to know, you can know, although it strikes me very mush that for reasons i don't understand, and really can't be bothered with, you absolutely DON'T want to know about this. Thats up to you, I really don't care.

    This remains one of the most likely major sources of future fule, not only on Earth, but for future space exploration, It may be outside the scope of your understanding,, but I'm guessing that is down to mind set rather than actual ability to follow the science, if you chose to.
  6. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

  7. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    As I found out when I was without a car for two short periods last year.
  8. blazer

    blazer Star commenter

    OK, lets just say for a minute that we have developed a process whereby an organism can use sunlight to produce molecular hydrogen (or some other usable fuel). To do this these in a significant way these organisms would have to harvest a sizeable quantity of the Sun's energy. Currently most of the energy arriving from the Sun reflects back off into space with a small portion retained by plants and another small percentage retained by greenhouse gases. If we absorb more sunlight onto the planet to create fuels and then we burn/react those fuels they will produce heat as a by product. Won't this result in the planet getting hotter? I suppose the same applies to sunlight harvested by solar panels.
  9. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    But I still don't see how you then extract the hydrogen from the water (the volumes of water would be huge) and then how do you store it.

    On a large enough scale to be useful it's a total non-starter
  10. blazer

    blazer Star commenter

    Current fuel cell vehicles use liquid hydrogen. One advantage of alternative fuels could be the ability to microscale them. Instead of requiring huge refineries/power stations etc production could be more local. Imagine a biogas generator for each street block where locals just dump their grass cuttings, kitchen waste etc into it or that the local sewer is connected to it.
  11. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    True - but they have efficient ways of extracting it.
  12. Moony

    Moony Lead commenter

    Yes, the conversation moved on to us both sharing the fact that we have scientific qualifications and then I asked you for some evidence for what you are saying. It's not an unreasonable request and you are now ignoring it. Conversations shift over time, you've put in less effort than I have to explain the science behind what you are saying.

    No, you havn't. All you's said is how plants do it and that you think we'll have it soon and said you've seen demo's so I should just take you word for it. I don't have to take your word for it if you word is not convincing.

    I never said anything about the idea or it's merit, I just asked you to provide some evidence for your claim, you are not providing evidence for you claim so I can dismiss your claim due to lack of evidence.

    Actually that's not how it works, it's not on me to find the evidence to support what you are saying.

    Well I can't really, the only detail you've given me is a vague notion of the research they are allegedly doing and the fact the Royal Society is involved. Not enough to go on really if I wanted to find the information, I'm not even sure which organisation you mean when you say Royal Society, I could guess that you mean the Royal Institute of Science or it could be one of the subject specific bodies.

    Except for the fact that you are making a positive claim about something and another science inclined person is asking for a citation. I wonder if I'd been gushing over what you were saying if your attitude to this would have been different. If I didn't want to know this I wouldn't be asking you for citations now would I?

    If you are so convinced that this is going to be the biggest and bestest next thing for humanity why are you so unwilling to provide information to those asking about it?

    Anyway, to paraphrase Hitchens slightly....what you are claiming without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
    EmanuelShadrack likes this.
  13. Mrsmumbles

    Mrsmumbles Star commenter

    Now not many 'manly' chaps of that era could carry that amount of pancake and eye make up off...
  14. Mrsmumbles

    Mrsmumbles Star commenter

    It is a truth universally under-acknowledged that Theresa's cabinet of curiosities s full of Wessen....Portland Police station has nowt on Westminster.
    peggylu, mathsmutt and Moony like this.
  15. stonerose

    stonerose Occasional commenter

    Dunnocks, please Sweetpea, doooon't. Get help! Get therapy! Exit!,

    If not, I am proposing that the TES posters specialist team carry out an intervention....immediately! This is how these dangerous cults snare you into their evil clutches Please don't make a grown woman weep.

    Mrsmumbles, dunnocks and galerider123 like this.
  16. schoolsout4summer

    schoolsout4summer Star commenter

    EmanuelShadrack and peggylu like this.
  17. Pomza

    Pomza Star commenter

    This is rather misleading and essentially inaccurate.
    SomethingWicked likes this.
  18. peggylu

    peggylu Star commenter


    Can you explain why you think it's inaccurate please. I think it sounds about right so would like to know if I'm mistaken.
  19. Pomza

    Pomza Star commenter

    The implication is that Academy Chains are profiting by the property 'given'. In actual fact, with nearly all academy sites, the property freehold is retained by the local authority. Grant maintained schools which do not own the freehold are never transferred to a trust on a freehold basis; this would only be the case in the rare instance where the school already owned the freehold directly (some foundation schools etc.). The property is never actually owned by central government in the first place.

    If a trust wishes to transfer/sell a portion of the property covered within the long term leasehold property, they will in most instances, require the permission of the DfE, which was not the case for LAs flogging playing-field etc. years ago.

    When additional leases are granted on an academy grounds, they are normally to other education/children's services providers.

    When a Trust ceases to control an academy, the leasehold agreement is terminated without any profit or payment due.

    Basically the '£10 billion of state property' has no realisable value.
    SomethingWicked and peggylu like this.
  20. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

Share This Page