What great lines...
 

D 1 wrote:
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


Donnie calling someone else "simple minded"? Now *THAT'S* funny!

Add to that the fact that at first the idiot was talking about waste
from working nuke plants, then when it was pointed out that there just
isn't much waste, he starts talking about TMI!!! If his son would wake
up from his drunken stupor, maybe he could teach his old dad something.

What great lines...
 

Don White wrote:
"D 1" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Just John II" wrote in message
...
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.

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.

Or, get back on the tit and stfu.
--
John H

In your case, it would be 'get back on the dick and stfu'.
Are you dumber than your son, Donnie? That was...pathetic.

Above goes double for you.



The kids here say "I know you are but what am I?" So now I know the
Canadian version.

Carry on...

What great lines...
 

NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.

Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long* time,
but no harm is done.

And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up dirt
that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in it!

He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.

What great lines...
 

NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
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


Donnie calling someone else "simple minded"? Now *THAT'S* funny!

Add to that the fact that at first the idiot was talking about waste
from working nuke plants, then when it was pointed out that there just
isn't much waste, he starts talking about TMI!!! If his son would wake
up from his drunken stupor, maybe he could teach his old dad something.

Yep.

What great lines...
 

"D 1" wrote in message
...
NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.

Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long* time,
but no harm is done.

And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up dirt
that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in it!

He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.

This is amusing...Dumb & Dumber trying to talk about nuclear waste.
Y'all haven't cleaned up your outhouses yet.

What great lines...
 

Don White wrote:
"D 1" wrote in message
...
NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.
Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long* time,
but no harm is done.
And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up dirt
that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in it!
He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.

This is amusing...Dumb & Dumber trying to talk about nuclear waste.
Y'all haven't cleaned up your outhouses yet.



No, dummy, you are amusing. Your pathetic life, however, is very sad.

What great lines...
 

Don White wrote:
"D 1" wrote in message
...
NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.
Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long* time,
but no harm is done.
And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up dirt
that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in it!
He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.

This is amusing...Dumb & Dumber trying to talk about nuclear waste.
Y'all haven't cleaned up your outhouses yet.



D Krueger just craps on the sidewalk..using an outhouse would require
him to attend some training.

Really, Don, when you see a stinking pile of crap like Krueger on the
sidewalk...just hold your nose and step over it.

What great lines...
 

"H K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"D 1" wrote in message
...
NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.
Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long* time,
but no harm is done.
And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up dirt
that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in it!
He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.

This is amusing...Dumb & Dumber trying to talk about nuclear waste.
Y'all haven't cleaned up your outhouses yet.

D Krueger just craps on the sidewalk..using an outhouse would require him
to attend some training.

Really, Don, when you see a stinking pile of crap like Krueger on the
sidewalk...just hold your nose and step over it.


Yup...back he goes into the septic tank for the 39th time.
He's desperate to be acknowledged by me or anyone for that matter....I guess
Margaret Kennedy and anyone else he has contact with do their best to avoid
him in real life.

What great lines...
 

Don White wrote:
"H K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"D 1" wrote in message
...
NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.
Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long* time,
but no harm is done.
And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up dirt
that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in it!
He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.
This is amusing...Dumb & Dumber trying to talk about nuclear waste.
Y'all haven't cleaned up your outhouses yet.
D Krueger just craps on the sidewalk..using an outhouse would require him
to attend some training.

Really, Don, when you see a stinking pile of crap like Krueger on the
sidewalk...just hold your nose and step over it.


Yup...back he goes into the septic tank for the 39th time.
He's desperate to be acknowledged by me or anyone for that matter....I guess
Margaret Kennedy and anyone else he has contact with do their best to avoid
him in real life.



Just leave him in there.

What great lines...
 

D 1 wrote:
Don White wrote:
"D 1" wrote in message
...
NotNow wrote:
D 1 wrote:
NotNow wrote:
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.
Yep. And nuclear waste degrades in storage. It takes a *long*
time, but no harm is done.
And there's places in the mountains out west where you can dig up
dirt that is more radioactive than the spent rods you are putting in
it!
He's an idiot. He won't believe until WAFA tells him to.

This is amusing...Dumb & Dumber trying to talk about nuclear waste.
Y'all haven't cleaned up your outhouses yet.


No, dummy, you are amusing. Your pathetic life, however, is very sad.

And just like his blow up doll Harry, he can't debate the facts so he
insults!