Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #51   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,099
Default What great lines...

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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,099
Default What great lines...

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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,995
Default What great lines...


"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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: May 2009
Posts: 826
Default What great lines...


"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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,099
Default What great lines...

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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 18
Default What great lines...

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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 18
Default What great lines...

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.
  #58   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,581
Default What great lines...

In article ,
says...

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!!!!


Don't be a Harry... snerk

--
Wafa free since 2009
  #59   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,995
Default What great lines...


"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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 4
Default What great lines...

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
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What great lines... J. Leo General 3 August 11th 09 04:07 PM
Anchor lines Gordon Cruising 67 December 21st 05 05:47 PM
Great Canal and Great Lake trip site Roger Long Cruising 3 June 7th 05 03:21 PM
12 meter lines Paul Proefrock Boat Building 3 January 14th 04 03:12 AM
Off Her Lines Bobsprit ASA 2 August 13th 03 09:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017