Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#51
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
D wrote:
Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Halifax can't get any worse. Our resident idiot makes it sound like there will be tons and tons of waste daily. And the idiot also doesn't realize that coal and oil power plants make many more tons of pollutants daily than a nuke plant would. It's just that the conventional plants spew it into the air, where according to some, it does no damage. |
#52
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just John II wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:09:24 -0300, "Don White" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Hey genius, you folks are the ones saying we're all going to drown in this century from global warming. John, who said that? In 10 thousand years, we could probably figure out what to do with what little waste actually comes from today's nuclear power technology. Do some reading. A lot less waste than we are generating with coal and oil fired power plants! Or, get back on the tit and stfu. -- There you go!!! That way he wouldn't look like such an idiot! |
#53
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "NotNow" wrote in message ... D wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Halifax can't get any worse. Our resident idiot makes it sound like there will be tons and tons of waste daily. And the idiot also doesn't realize that coal and oil power plants make many more tons of pollutants daily than a nuke plant would. It's just that the conventional plants spew it into the air, where according to some, it does no damage. You simple minded moron. Can't remember Three Mile Island? http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html |
#54
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Don White" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... D wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Halifax can't get any worse. Our resident idiot makes it sound like there will be tons and tons of waste daily. And the idiot also doesn't realize that coal and oil power plants make many more tons of pollutants daily than a nuke plant would. It's just that the conventional plants spew it into the air, where according to some, it does no damage. You simple minded moron. Can't remember Three Mile Island? http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html Yup, and it released much less radiation than a 1/2 day of the radiation that coal fired plants release. And 3 mile had a couple problems. The idiot who shut down the cooling was an affirmative action hire. Not hired because he was capable. I am not saying minorities can not do the job, but hire a competant minority. Lots of those. And the French build every plant the same. Exactly the same layout, same controls. So anybody trained in any plant can go to another plant. Even the bathrooms are located the same. I think the most we ever build the same was 2. |
#55
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Calif Bill wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... D wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Halifax can't get any worse. Our resident idiot makes it sound like there will be tons and tons of waste daily. And the idiot also doesn't realize that coal and oil power plants make many more tons of pollutants daily than a nuke plant would. It's just that the conventional plants spew it into the air, where according to some, it does no damage. You simple minded moron. Can't remember Three Mile Island? http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html Yup, and it released much less radiation than a 1/2 day of the radiation that coal fired plants release. And 3 mile had a couple problems. The idiot who shut down the cooling was an affirmative action hire. Not hired because he was capable. I am not saying minorities can not do the job, but hire a competant minority. Lots of those. And the French build every plant the same. Exactly the same layout, same controls. So anybody trained in any plant can go to another plant. Even the bathrooms are located the same. I think the most we ever build the same was 2. Good gawd that boy is stupid!!!! |
#56
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:29:15 -0300, "Don White"
wrote: "NotNow" wrote in message ... D wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Halifax can't get any worse. Our resident idiot makes it sound like there will be tons and tons of waste daily. And the idiot also doesn't realize that coal and oil power plants make many more tons of pollutants daily than a nuke plant would. It's just that the conventional plants spew it into the air, where according to some, it does no damage. You simple minded moron. Can't remember Three Mile Island? http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html Hee, hee. Donnie is calling someone 'simple-minded'. The Three Mile Island incident occurred thirty years ago. Do you not think technology has improved in thirty years? Think about it, we could just replicate French reactors. *YOU* should *never* call names reflecting on the intelligence of others. Get back on the tit, Donnie. Harry misses you. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. |
#57
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:12:11 -0400, NotNow wrote:
Just John II wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:09:24 -0300, "Don White" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Hey genius, you folks are the ones saying we're all going to drown in this century from global warming. John, who said that? In 10 thousand years, we could probably figure out what to do with what little waste actually comes from today's nuclear power technology. Do some reading. A lot less waste than we are generating with coal and oil fired power plants! Or, get back on the tit and stfu. -- There you go!!! That way he wouldn't look like such an idiot! Al Gore made a movie showing lots of places getting flooded very soon. Did you not see it? Here, watch this. It may show Florida being sunk, along with New York City. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. |
#59
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "JLH" wrote in message ... On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:29:15 -0300, "Don White" wrote: "NotNow" wrote in message ... D wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Halifax can't get any worse. Our resident idiot makes it sound like there will be tons and tons of waste daily. And the idiot also doesn't realize that coal and oil power plants make many more tons of pollutants daily than a nuke plant would. It's just that the conventional plants spew it into the air, where according to some, it does no damage. You simple minded moron. Can't remember Three Mile Island? http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html Hee, hee. Donnie is calling someone 'simple-minded'. The Three Mile Island incident occurred thirty years ago. Do you not think technology has improved in thirty years? Think about it, we could just replicate French reactors. *YOU* should *never* call names reflecting on the intelligence of others. Get back on the tit, Donnie. Harry misses you. -- John H Get back on the dick, Johnny..your Dope Army misses you. |
#60
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:00:21 -0400, JLH
wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:12:11 -0400, NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:09:24 -0300, "Don White" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "NotNow" wrote in message ... Keith Nuttle wrote: NotNow wrote: Just John II wrote: On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: J. Leo wrote: "But a growing number of policy makers say that the world's rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases, proponents of this view say, a series of global environmental, social, political and possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have to address." One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why not Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all these global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA? And, suppose no one of consequence follows. Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power. There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant. Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics. I agree with this post. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly believe it's really happening???? http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/ There are some people who believe the only long term economical solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear plant. ) The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to be in response to global warming gives no significant support for nuclear energy. I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any party. The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant business. The regulations make it so. Just where would you geniuses store all the spent radioactive materials generated by these plants for the next 10 thousand years?? Hey genius, you folks are the ones saying we're all going to drown in this century from global warming. John, who said that? In 10 thousand years, we could probably figure out what to do with what little waste actually comes from today's nuclear power technology. Do some reading. A lot less waste than we are generating with coal and oil fired power plants! Or, get back on the tit and stfu. -- There you go!!! That way he wouldn't look like such an idiot! Al Gore made a movie showing lots of places getting flooded very soon. Did you not see it? Here, watch this. It may show Florida being sunk, along with New York City. Whoops. He http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEJ5pHVKjiI -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
What great lines... | General | |||
Anchor lines | Cruising | |||
Great Canal and Great Lake trip site | Cruising | |||
12 meter lines | Boat Building | |||
Off Her Lines | ASA |