"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
ink.net...

What if they're right? Or, more important, is is possible for there to
be ANY evidence that would convince you?


One major volcanic eruption spews more ozone depleting chemicals in a
week than mankind does in years. When Krakatoa erupted in 1883, upper
Midwesterners almost starved that year. Between the ash and chemicals,
it induced a volcano winter. Was snow in the Midwest in July and the
corn crop failed. We are seeing more solar activity. This does not
count? maybe it is man and all the political spewing that is
contaminating the air and causing the hot air warming. These same
"Scientists" were predicting a mini-iceage circa 1970. Maybe ice age
grant money dried up. As to Kyoto. Would only hamper the US. France,
being 80% nuclear at the time, was posice to make a killing selling
electric power. China, could still go along, burning excess amounts of
dirty coal, and no penalty, as they are a "Backwards" country. China is
the biggest cause of mercury in tuna and other pelegic fish. All that
coal burning release of mercury has to go somewhere, and that is out over
the Pacific.


That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to come
up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution is worth
controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me if
this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this subject, no
matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End of story, and I'm
not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth to the
third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell polution
credites then what does it accomplish?

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to
come up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution is
worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing is
free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.



If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me if
this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this subject, no
matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End of story, and I'm
not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth to
the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell polution
credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits. Neither
do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free pass for some
companies to continue polluting. Have you written to your legislators about
it?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to
come up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution is
worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing is
free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists the
"science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly questionable
value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians, hoping
to look good for the next election, and those countries that will be selling
their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that will be placed into
the atmosphere will still be the same. What have you accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over the US
and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world wide than
anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me if
this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this subject,
no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End of story, and
I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth to
the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell polution
credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits. Neither
do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free pass for some
companies to continue polluting. Have you written to your legislators
about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth in
mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by bringing
the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to
come up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution is
worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing is
free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists the
"science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly
questionable value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians,
hoping to look good for the next election, and those countries that will
be selling their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that will be
placed into the atmosphere will still be the same. What have you
accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over the
US and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world wide than
anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me
if this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this subject,
no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End of story,
and I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth to
the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell
polution credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits.
Neither do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free pass
for some companies to continue polluting. Have you written to your
legislators about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth in
mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by
bringing the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.



I'm talking for the moment about pollution credits traded only IN THIS
COUNTRY, between domestic corporations. It's the same diseased idea as the
international ones, except that we know which criminals voted it into law.
Have you written to your lawbreakers about this?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to
come up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution
is worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing is
free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists
the "science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly
questionable value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians,
hoping to look good for the next election, and those countries that will
be selling their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that will be
placed into the atmosphere will still be the same. What have you
accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over the
US and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world wide than
anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me
if this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this subject,
no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End of story,
and I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth to
the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell
polution credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits.
Neither do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free pass
for some companies to continue polluting. Have you written to your
legislators about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth in
mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by
bringing the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.



I'm talking for the moment about pollution credits traded only IN THIS
COUNTRY, between domestic corporations. It's the same diseased idea as the
international ones, except that we know which criminals voted it into law.
Have you written to your lawbreakers about this?

He wouldn't do anything about it because it benefits the little man in some
way.

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
news

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to
come up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution
is worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing
is free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists
the "science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly
questionable value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians,
hoping to look good for the next election, and those countries that will
be selling their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that will be
placed into the atmosphere will still be the same. What have you
accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over
the US and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world wide
than anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me
if this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this
subject, no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End
of story, and I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth
to the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell
polution credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits.
Neither do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free pass
for some companies to continue polluting. Have you written to your
legislators about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth
in mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by
bringing the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.



I'm talking for the moment about pollution credits traded only IN THIS
COUNTRY, between domestic corporations. It's the same diseased idea as
the international ones, except that we know which criminals voted it into
law. Have you written to your lawbreakers about this?

He wouldn't do anything about it because it benefits the little man in
some way.


No dancing. Are you one of those who believe that cleaning up a smokestack
will throw a utility into financial hardship, result in unemployment, and
turn a little town into a crime-ridden hell? That story?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
news

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone
to come up with evidence which would convince you that our
contribution is worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing
is free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists
the "science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly
questionable value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians,
hoping to look good for the next election, and those countries that
will be selling their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that
will be placed into the atmosphere will still be the same. What have
you accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over
the US and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world
wide than anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell
me if this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this
subject, no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End
of story, and I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth
to the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell
polution credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits.
Neither do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free
pass for some companies to continue polluting. Have you written to
your legislators about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth
in mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by
bringing the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.



I'm talking for the moment about pollution credits traded only IN THIS
COUNTRY, between domestic corporations. It's the same diseased idea as
the international ones, except that we know which criminals voted it
into law. Have you written to your lawbreakers about this?

He wouldn't do anything about it because it benefits the little man in
some way.


No dancing. Are you one of those who believe that cleaning up a smokestack
will throw a utility into financial hardship, result in unemployment, and
turn a little town into a crime-ridden hell? That story?

No dancing. I got gerrymandered. I used to be in a republican dominated
district, the token Republican in a see of Democrats, now I am in a district
that spans two counties. But, the part of the district I am in is mainly
Republican and is more of a finger to move us into a Democrat dominated
district. And, the old district lost a majority of its Republicans. I wish
Tom Delay would move to Maryland.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
news

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone
to come up with evidence which would convince you that our
contribution is worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing
is free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists
the "science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly
questionable value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians,
hoping to look good for the next election, and those countries that
will be selling their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that
will be placed into the atmosphere will still be the same. What have
you accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over
the US and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world
wide than anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell
me if this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this
subject, no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End
of story, and I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth
to the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell
polution credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits.
Neither do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free
pass for some companies to continue polluting. Have you written to
your legislators about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth
in mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by
bringing the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.



I'm talking for the moment about pollution credits traded only IN THIS
COUNTRY, between domestic corporations. It's the same diseased idea as
the international ones, except that we know which criminals voted it
into law. Have you written to your lawbreakers about this?

He wouldn't do anything about it because it benefits the little man in
some way.


No dancing. Are you one of those who believe that cleaning up a smokestack
will throw a utility into financial hardship, result in unemployment, and
turn a little town into a crime-ridden hell? That story?


Different argument. The thread is on Global Warming, not pollution damage.

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:21:52 -0500, "Bert Robbins" wrote:


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

That wasn't the question. I asked you if it is possible for anyone to
come up with evidence which would convince you that our contribution is
worth controlling.

Not at the expense of the USA's future.

I know you won't answer the next question, but what the hell - typing is
free. Ready?
What specific changes do you think would be so disastrous to the USA's
economic future? No cutting and pasting. Pretend you're a reporter.
Summarize it in your own words, in two paragraphs or less.

From discussions I have had with environmental scientists and chemists the
"science" that is the basis of the Kyoto Protocols is of highly questionable
value and does not stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

The only people that are pushing the Kyoto Protocols are politicians, hoping
to look good for the next election, and those countries that will be selling
their pollution credits. The amount of pollution that will be placed into
the atmosphere will still be the same. What have you accomplished?

Immediate solution is to start building nuclear power plants all over the US
and the world. This will do more to decrease pollution world wide than
anything else.

If you find it difficult to answer that for some reason, then tell me if
this comes close to matching your view:
"There's not a chance in hell that I'd believe anyone on this subject,
no matter how perfect their research might be. Period. End of story, and
I'm not listening any more".

The Kyoto protocols are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth to
the third world and communist countries. If you can buy and sell polution
credites then what does it accomplish?

By this, I suspect you don't like the system of pollution credits. Neither
do I. They're being used here, and they function as a free pass for some
companies to continue polluting. Have you written to your legislators
about it?

The pollution credits are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth in
mode of social engineering. Bringing the developing countries up by bringing
the developed countries down will only make everyone unhappy.


I agree with the 'Go Nuclear' philosophy. The Navy has been using nuclear
reactors on big ships for years, without incident. We should have the same
reactors all over the place. Hell, I'd donate part of Harry's back yard for one.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes