How Much Lithium is in a Lithium-Ion Battery?

"Are we finally becoming aware of the impact of human overpopulation of the world on engineering?"

...or on anything else? Good Point!!!

Apparently not, for most people.

I have the impression that religion interferes with rationality in many (perhaps most) people. I think I would have voted for McCain, but not with this VP candidate and her views on birth!

Art of living on trees is much better than art of living in mobile metal boxes. However, human world now is more metal friendly, and it is multiplying rapidly like virus.

I'll send you what I sent Shyam since the 'both' includes you.

You both sound like complete morons. Go back and think about your suggestions and statements. Cars running on water and solar?!!! Please tell me you were joking! If not, quadruple the first sentence and then sit down and work out the math - if you can.

Add to that your totally moronic and obviously completely ignorant statement about religion (well, I do have to give you some versions of religion - but the statement cannot be made generally and not scream of ignorance and intolerance). Yes, you are very obviously an intolerant person. Hurts to know the truth doesn't it. It also appears that you support murder for personal convenience, which is exactly what abortion is and nothing else and try to hide the inhumanity, horror, and shame in words like 'pro-choice' I assume. More children have been murdered for convenience in the US since Rowe vs. Wade than all the Jews killed in the Holocaust. Oh wait, based on your expressed views you probably don't believe in the Holocaust. OK, more have died than in the Civil War. You do believe that happened I assume. The attitude of the pro-choicer is, 'Well, I wanted the pleasure, but I don't want the conequences. A child would be inconvenient - especially for getting more pleasure.' What a maroon! Murder for convenience. Such a pleasant thing. Why don't you try getting all those convicted murderers off death row? I'm sure killing those people was convenient for them - no witnesses etc. I'm sure that some of them got their pleasure but didn't want the consequences. Same difference. Why do you seem to believe that murdering an adult for convenience is more heinous than murdering an innocent child who has their entire life before them for convenience? This is God's choice, not a choice for a self-serving and selfish mother - or her prideful and selfish parents (if they are the ones pushing it). Why should a child have to lose its life because of the selfishness of the parent who brought it to life to begin with?

F-Tard: How did you turn a discussion of lithium into a rant about abortion?? Take some lithium, fer chrissake!

I didn't. dkwarner did. Pronouncements like his deserve and need a response. If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. I was surprised and dismayed that nobody beat me to it.

This tirade barely deserves a response, but I must say, it deserves many more "off-topic" votes than the one I gave it. This is a wonderful example of turning a rational discussion into a personal rant. Please learn some manners, if nothing else.

I'm sorry, but not surprised, that you hide behind 'Guest'.

There is one thing that is an undisputable FACT: There IS a limit to the number of humans that can sustainably live on this planet. (And by the way, energy limitations prevent us from sending more than a few colonizers to any other place in the universe, so we are stuck with this planet forever.) Sure, we can argue over just what that limit is, but there is no question that a limit exists. I suspect we may have already passed that limit (remember sustainably), but that can't be proven or disproven yet, if ever.

If left uncontrolled, population will grow until its demands exceed the resources available, so we have two possible choices: 1. Control it ourselves, or 2. Let Nature control it.

Option 1 includes:A) conception control (Abstinence, Rhythm, and various chemical means), B) birth control (Abortion), C) euthanasia (eg. assisted suicide), and D) murder and war.

Option 2 includes: A) Disease, B) Famine, C) Flood, D) Earthquake, E) Volcanic activity, F) a large asteroid, G) overheating or overcooling of the Earth, etc. I think we could also include murder and war in this option, since they naturally increase with population.

Now you tell me: Which do YOU choose?

Personally, I think Option 1 A,B, and C are highly preferable over the rest. I have used 1A to set an example, and do hope to be able to use 1C in 20 or 30 years, to avoid the hopeless conditions of two of my elderly close relatives.

Please respond!

Sorry I haven't responded sooner - very very busy.

I choose to "hide behind guest" simply due to what happened to my computer the last time I made a conservative (and actually less controversial) statement due to a very left-thinking hacker who disagreed with me. He demanded tolerance and freedom of speech, but couldn't afford anyone who disagreed with his view the same benefits. Kind of like the "No on Prop 8" folks in California stealing "Yes" signs and vandalizing peoples property. Kind of like Obama kicking the press out of his plane and entourage if they ask him a tough question and press him to actually answer it.

Anyway, to the question at hand. I'm sure that there is some limit. No doubt about that. However, God has said several times that the earth has enough to support man's needs. He set the limit and I'm sure that He will be the one to exercise the controls. Now that doesn't mean that we can all just go crazy here on earth in havng babies and using as many resources as possible. He did say to exercise moderation in all things and that the earth had what we needed if we were willing to share and help one another. Wait a second. . . you were ridiculing those who believe in God in your first post so I guess this argument is not to your liking or approval.

OK. Lets take a different approach. You said, "but that can't be proven or disproven yet, if ever". If we had reached the limit already as you suggest, it would be incredibly obvious. There would be widespread starvation, lack of just about everything because it had already run out, and there would be a total worldwide collapse of society. No, we haven't hit the limit yet nor are we close. Until you can provide any sort of proof that we are in imminent danger of such a collapse of the human race or anywhere even close to it, your claim that we need to control things by murdering innocent children is an empty and specious arguement. (I am glad that your first choice was abstinence over abortion.) Even if such a thing was coming down around us the answer would never be murder. There are too many brilliant minds and too much time before such an apolcalypse to worry enough about it to kill children. Take for example the hybrid rice that was developed back in the 70's and in widespread use by the early 80's that increased the production of a field of rice 100 fold. Since then advances have come much faster and most, or at least many countries have huge stockpiles of wheat, rice and other staples. We are finally investing more in renewable energy instead of continuing the wholesale use of nonrenewables. etc.... As I stated before, the mainstream push behind abortion is selfishness - wanting the supposed freedom and the pleasure but not the consequences and inconveniences that come with it - not concern over the population of the world. That is only the very few like you - or those who are looking for something - anything to support their arguement. However that arguement holds no water.

If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything.

Which would I choose? I choose to be wise in my use of resources. I choose to excercise moderation in all things, including the number of children I have. I choose to do my part in trying to make this world a better place and improving the human condition. I choose to be of service to my fellowmen - not murder those I think can be thrown away. Finally, and most importantly, I choose to live righteously and after all that I can do, to leave my fate and the fate of the world in the hands of God. Man, and especially government just screw it up such as when they legalized the murder of innocents for the convenience of the not so innocent and then called that incredibly wicked act "good" and a "woman's right".

Thank you for responding!

PP#1: Kind of like the "yes on Prop 8" folks in CA using children's pictures in adds, and refusing to remove them when the parents complain.

PP#2: I was NOT ridiculing those who believe in God. I was simply stating a historically observable fact. Any reasonable, intelligent person can see the benefits of moderation in all things, sharing, and helping one another, whether or not that person believes in any particular God or group of Gods. At the time the Bible was written, there WAS plenty for everyone, because 'everyone' included a vastly smaller number of people (close to 200 Million, according to several estimates listed by the US Census bureau). With current world population around 6500 million, that's over 32 people now for every single person of biblical times. With all the comforts many of us have become accustomed to, our per capita use of resources has increased by a factor of tens to hundreds, so the world consumption of resources has increased something like 1000-fold over biblical times.

PP#3: It has been shown in a number of studies (one that comes to mind - Dr. Albert Bartlett, U of Colorado), that it is NOT obvious to most people that a resource is about to fail, until well after the resource availability has passed its peak.

I have never advocated murder, and never will. Look up the definition of the word! "Murder implies malicious and premeditated killing of one person by another" (Oxford)(Webster adds the word illegal). There is nothing malicious about terminating a pregnancy when it is known well before birth that the birth would result in an individual that could never contribute to society and would require the lifelong care of its mother and society. What other animal wastes its time and energy raising defective offspring? "the mainstream push behind abortion is selfishness" Not at all! It is about quality of life, for the fetus, for the mother, and for society as a whole. You seem to think abortion is the principal method of population control - it is a very minor part of the big picture.

PP#4: You bet I stand for something: Quality, not Quantity!

PP#5: I agree with everthing up until "leave my fate..." I chose to have NO children. If there is a God and a judgement day, I trust that God will be wise enough to see that I have spent most of my life helping others.

PP#1: Kind of like the "yes on Prop 8" folks in CA using children's pictures in adds, and refusing to remove them when the parents complain.

Where do you live and where is your info coming from? The statement above is patently false. All of the children in Yes on Prop 8 adds were there only because of parental permission. The gay misinformation czars may be refering to a few seconds of a public video in one of the adds. However, even there parents gave permission for the footage to be used publicly even though they may not have given permission specifically to the Yes of prop 8 folks, it was public video with full permissions and at that point anyone had legal right to use it - permission already given. It had already been used several times by others, including by the gay/lesbian coalition. There were no parents requesting their childrens images not be used. It would have done tremendous damage to the Yes campaign and would have received a lot of play if it was actually true. Must have been more devisive No on 8 propaganda - patently untrue - like everthing else they have said. By the way, the No on prop 8 folks stole signs off my property this very morning and from many of my neighbors properties as well and from all locations throughout town, trying to take away my freedom of speech while they demand theirs. Typical. We had received warning that they were planning this, so I had extra signs to replace the ones that were stolren. That is why the activist judges, who thumbed their noses at the people of California and at the law itself, made sure that the language was, "acceptance ... is mandatory." If you disagree with them, you just lost your freedom of speech and freedom of religion. If anyone else tried to take away our rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion they would be called either foreign terrorists or traitors. That is the goal of Osama Bin Laden. The liberal traitor judges did it for him and people are looking the other way. Just look how far we've come.

PP#2. Go reread what you said as if you were someone else seeing it for the first time. If you didn't mean to ridicule you should have stated it differently. At the least you can't just lump all religion in there together since most religion/religions do not advocate extremism. But to begin with, it had no place in the discussion and there was no reason for bringing it up. That only adds to the apparent intent. If you would read the Bible, you would see that God himself continuously encourages moderation in all things. Zealots, whether religious or not, only screw things up for everyone. God wants us and encourages us to be reasonable and intelligent beings. Being of service to others is essentially the central theme here. Some of the things God talked to the prophets about were specifically for the people in that day. Some of them also talk specifically about our day. In the statement referred to, He was talking about our day. He didn't say, "Well, you will not run out of such and such mineral" or anything like that. He said that there was enough for the needs of man. He expects uys to be industrious and intellignet and smart. He expects us to help ourselves by finding new ways of doing things etc and he does expect us to treat the earth with repsect and conservation. He gave us talents and abilities and our minds and He expects us to put them to good use.

PP#3:There are all kinds of studies that say all kinds of things on all kinds of topics and a year later another comes out and turns it upside down. So one guy did one study, and if anything on one specific thing and if nobody noticed - must not have been that important of a thing. However, the point that you had made was that the human race had already exceeded the earths limits in general - not just for pink tea leaves for example. I think we'd really quickly learn that there was a food shortage. I don't think that one would get by us too easily and it would not take long at all. I think mankind is smarter than to miss being out of food, out of oil, out of steel, out of aluminum. We're not that daft as a race. Just think about it for a minute.

As far as your recent arguements about abortion, I never said that there were not appropriate reasons. However, I personally feel that those are limited to rape/incest, physical wellbeing of the mother, and where the child is not expected by the doctors to survive birth. I have special needs cousins and friends, and friends with special needs children. None of their parents would ever have wanted it the other way. In all cases, they were given an opportunity to serve someone else and have grown and are better people for it. Their families are stronger and their siblings and relatives are more caring and compassionate than they would have been. All in all a lot of much more Christlike people. I think if you look into it, you will find that special needs people have actually contributed a lot to their families and communities.

"You seem to think abortion is the principal method of population control". I never said anything of the sort. However, it is true that since abortion was legalized in the US, more children have been murdered under its guise than men who have died in most of the wars that we could talk about. Do you know how many? The numbers are staggering and I suppose are probably low as it is difficult in any social field to make sure that all data is included. How many of those were because the child was not viable or because of rape or incest? Maybe 10% - maybe. The liberals want you to believe that it is all 100% So what about all the rest of them? What about the 90%? It is this far larger group that wanted the fun without the consequence, didn't want the inconvenience - in other words - the ones that are selfish. Yes, some abortions happen for appropriate reasons - most don't.

I'm glad that you spend your time helping others. That is a big key and it espouses how God has told us we need to treat each other. It will do a lot for you at the judgement bar.

I think at this point we must agree to disagree. I don't imagine either of us has unlimited time to keep writing back and forth and it seems quite apparent that it will take a lot more than this exchange to change either of our minds.

Take care and keep up the service to others.

This discussion really makes one wish they had not made so much fun of geology and all the athletes that took the class!

Thank you!

Give me a $10 million 5 year grant to research, and I will determine if new sources of unobtainium can be developed for the succcessful inplementation of your new technology! If the higher efficiencies are there, we'll make a fortune!

I was thinking along those lines myself...

Holy cow, if we use up all the lithium, all the manic-depressives will go totally wild!

Please see dkwarner 's comment number 25 for the solution to this problem and be carefully about mentioning cows, holy or any other kind as you may offend the rabid guest that is haunting this thread.

BAB