B0ycey wrote:If you don't even look, you won't find the evidence Steve. I gave you a link to the book. I am not even suggesting you buy it, but that is the evidence so if you want to know more, you'll have to buy it. If you do buy it and read it, then it will convince you because he explains everything. I gave you a snippet, there is so more evidence in the book. But whatever, there is actually no evidence it is a tomb anyway.
The rest, meh. We are going round in circles here. I am saying fossil fuels are not needed as you can harness energy in other ways and ET would most definitely had taken another technological path given fossil fuels are inefficient and you don't really address my point but give me some notion that fossil fuels are going to boil ocean, we'd use all the energy in 400 years or that lightening is rubbish because we don't know when it will strike. Who cares. There are other ways to harness energy, that alone means fossil fuels are not needed for energy period.
B0ycey, you have said several times that fossil fuels are "inefficient".
I suggested that you meant not concentrated like nuclear power is. You seemed to reject that correction, and repeated your usage.
Some facts you may not realize are =>
1] A barrel of oil is 42 US gal.
2] A barrel of oil is the energy of a man working hard for about 5 years.
3] So, filling your gas tank puts energy into it equal to about 2.5 years of a man working hard.
4] At $10/hour this is $10 x 8hr/day x 5days/week x 52weeks/yr x 2.5 yr = $52,000 worth of work.
6] At $4/gal this costs you $4/gal. x 22gal./tank =$88/tank
7] This means oil is 52,000/88 = 590 times more work/$ than a human can do.
. . . As power it is some what more concentrated. You can burn 88 gal. in 1/2 day. It takes a human 2.5 years to do that much work. The ratio is 1825 to 1. [Here I converted years into days as 2.5 x 365 = 912.5 days and divide it by 0.5 to get = 1825.
8] Using oil seems very efficient compared to humans working.
9] The engine to use the oil weights a ton maybe. The reactor to use nuclear power weights much, much more. The reactor produces more power than the car engine does. But, the weights/power ratios seem to still be in favor of the engine.
[Yes, my figures are rough estimates, except the barrels of oil =5 years of work. Also, I hope my calculations are correct.]
I'm asserting that this info shows that it is hard to imagine that aliens on a planet that has no fossil fuels will discover nuclear power.
You think that the ancient Egyptians discovered how to get energy out of a very big pile of big rocks, so you think you know how they could.
I'm not going to believe that. It is an extraordinary claim, and so, it needs good, solid evidence. So far, you have pointed to one book. While this is evidence, it isn't solid evidence. It has not convinced one expert that you can point to. It may have, but you can't say who it is.