Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Bright Side Of Global Warmth
36 views
Skip to first unread message
Way Back Jack
Nov 13, 2012, 2:09:11 PM11/13/12
to
Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
media? But a miraculous thing happened .... global warmth. Someone from up
above heard our prayers and I for one am ecstatic. Anyone in his right
mind should be. Anyone in his right mind prefers unseasonable warmth to
freezing his ass off.
Thank you to the powers above and to all those who prayed along with me to
be delivered from the "new ice age."
cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
media? But a miraculous thing happened .... global warmth. Someone from up
above heard our prayers and I for one am ecstatic. Anyone in his right
mind should be. Anyone in his right mind prefers unseasonable warmth to
freezing his ass off.
Thank you to the powers above and to all those who prayed along with me to
be delivered from the "new ice age."
Christopher A. Lee
Nov 13, 2012, 2:38:55 PM11/13/12
to
alt.bitterness
sci.environment
alt.global.warming
rec.gardens
alt.atheism
Father Haskell
Nov 13, 2012, 3:33:53 PM11/13/12
to
On Nov 13, 2:09Â pm, Way Back Jack <inva...@invalid.net> wrote:
> Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> media? But a miraculous thing happened .... global warmth. Â Someone from up
> above heard our prayers and I for one am ecstatic. Â Anyone in his right
> mind should be. Â Anyone in his right mind prefers unseasonable warmth to
> freezing his ass off.
It's not the cold so much as shoveling 4 feet of snow that
> Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> media? But a miraculous thing happened .... global warmth. Â Someone from up
> above heard our prayers and I for one am ecstatic. Â Anyone in his right
> mind should be. Â Anyone in his right mind prefers unseasonable warmth to
> freezing his ass off.
makes winter suck. Guess which is caused by heat?
linuxgal
Nov 15, 2012, 10:43:30 PM11/15/12
to
Way Back Jack wrote:
> Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> media?
Sure, right here.
> Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> media?
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aIMCxrhb91c/T3N9flvVBAI/AAAAAAAABdU/zsW892nGOtM/s640/time-magazine-ice-age-global-warming.gif
What's funny also, is the 1977 cover has a blurb for a story that goes
"Why We Can't Beat The Soviets". Great track record there, Time. Morons.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
Billy
Nov 25, 2012, 2:27:28 PM11/25/12
to
In article <KJSdnccsltn-KzjN...@giganews.com>,
your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
Fact:
CO2 increases atmospheric temperatures, which lead to warmer oceans, and
melting ice, which leads to an increase in atmospheric water vapor.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_vapor#Water_vapor_in_Earth.27s_atmos
phere>
Gaseous water represents a small but environmentally significant
constituent of the atmosphere. The percentage water vapor in surface air
varies from a trace in desert regions to about 4% over oceans.[13]
Approximately 99.13% of it is contained in the troposphere. The
condensation of water vapor to the liquid or ice phase is responsible
for clouds, rain, snow, and other precipitation, all of which count
among the most significant elements of what we experience as weather.
Less obviously, the latent heat of vaporization, which is released to
the atmosphere whenever condensation occurs, is one of the most
important terms in the atmospheric energy budget on both local and
global scales. For example, latent heat release in atmospheric
convection is directly responsible for powering destructive storms such
as tropical cyclones and severe thunderstorms.
Fact:
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/02/us-climate-weather-idUSTRE8112
0K20120202>
Most U.S. meteorologists (radio & TV) -- 82 percent in a 2011 survey --
are convinced that climate is changing, but many say it's changing
because of natural causes, or human and natural causes combined.
That contrasts with about 95 percent of climate "scientists" (no
advertising money) who are convinced that climate change is occurring
and that human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, are
a key driver of it. This tallies with the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, which reported with 90 percent certainty in 2007 on
the causes and effects of climate change.
Fact:
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/apr/08/koch-brot
hers-lobbying>
Across a range of activities  from the birth of the Tea Party to
undermining unions in Wisconsin, to opposing efforts to curb global
warming  they have been believed by many Democrats to be forever
lurking behind the headlines. Now, a brilliant piece of investigative
reporting by the Washington-based watchdog Centre for Public Integrity
has detailed the Kochs' vast political and lobbying operations. It makes
sobering and deeply disturbing reading. After all, it is one thing to
believe that out there somewhere the devil exists, but reading the CPI
report feels a little like being given his phone number.
The sums of money spent in furthering Koch (pronounced like the drink
coke, no matter how tempting it is to rhyme it with rock) interests and
power are staggering. But what is most disturbing is how rapidly they
are growing. In 2004, the CPI found, the Kochs spent a "mere" $857,000
on lobbying. In 2008, that had grown to $20m dollars. Over the next two
years, they then spent a further $20.5m.
The causes are varied but self-centred around the vital interests of
Koch Industries such as oil, energy, chemicals and financial products.
Employing no less than 30 lobbyists in Washington, Koch Industries has
lobbied to change more than 100 pieces of federal legislation. They
included trying to loosen regulations on potentially poisonous
substances like dioxins, benzene and asbestos. They have pushed back
against restrictions on carbon emissions and funded thinktanks and
groups that promote efforts to discredit climate change science. They
tried to soften attempts at financial reform where the Kochs operate in
the derivatives market. Wherever a law touched on a Koch corporate
interests, there were the company's lobbyists trying to gut, deaden or
defeat any attempt at regulation.
Fact:
<http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/112781/top-climate-change-denying-scient
ist-found-to-be-on-exxon-koch-brothers-payroll/>
Top Climate Change-Denying Scientist Found to Be on Exxon, Koch
BrothersÄ… Payroll
Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for
Astrophysics, was paid $1 million over 10 years to express the view that
CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming.
------
As with the tobacco companies, as long as fossil fuel extractors can
disseminate confusion, they can keep making money on tomorrows misery.
--
Welcome to the New America.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>
or
E Pluribus Unum
Next time vote Green Party
linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> Way Back Jack wrote:
> > Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> > cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> > media?
>
> Sure, right here.
>
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aIMCxrhb91c/T3N9flvVBAI/AAAAAAAABdU/zsW892nGOtM/s640
> /time-magazine-ice-age-global-warming.gif
>
> What's funny also, is the 1977 cover has a blurb for a story that goes
> "Why We Can't Beat The Soviets". Great track record there, Time. Morons.
So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
> Way Back Jack wrote:
> > Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> > cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> > media?
>
> Sure, right here.
>
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aIMCxrhb91c/T3N9flvVBAI/AAAAAAAABdU/zsW892nGOtM/s640
> /time-magazine-ice-age-global-warming.gif
>
> What's funny also, is the 1977 cover has a blurb for a story that goes
> "Why We Can't Beat The Soviets". Great track record there, Time. Morons.
your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
Fact:
CO2 increases atmospheric temperatures, which lead to warmer oceans, and
melting ice, which leads to an increase in atmospheric water vapor.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_vapor#Water_vapor_in_Earth.27s_atmos
phere>
Gaseous water represents a small but environmentally significant
constituent of the atmosphere. The percentage water vapor in surface air
varies from a trace in desert regions to about 4% over oceans.[13]
Approximately 99.13% of it is contained in the troposphere. The
condensation of water vapor to the liquid or ice phase is responsible
for clouds, rain, snow, and other precipitation, all of which count
among the most significant elements of what we experience as weather.
Less obviously, the latent heat of vaporization, which is released to
the atmosphere whenever condensation occurs, is one of the most
important terms in the atmospheric energy budget on both local and
global scales. For example, latent heat release in atmospheric
convection is directly responsible for powering destructive storms such
as tropical cyclones and severe thunderstorms.
Fact:
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/02/us-climate-weather-idUSTRE8112
0K20120202>
Most U.S. meteorologists (radio & TV) -- 82 percent in a 2011 survey --
are convinced that climate is changing, but many say it's changing
because of natural causes, or human and natural causes combined.
That contrasts with about 95 percent of climate "scientists" (no
advertising money) who are convinced that climate change is occurring
and that human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, are
a key driver of it. This tallies with the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, which reported with 90 percent certainty in 2007 on
the causes and effects of climate change.
Fact:
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/apr/08/koch-brot
hers-lobbying>
Across a range of activities  from the birth of the Tea Party to
undermining unions in Wisconsin, to opposing efforts to curb global
warming  they have been believed by many Democrats to be forever
lurking behind the headlines. Now, a brilliant piece of investigative
reporting by the Washington-based watchdog Centre for Public Integrity
has detailed the Kochs' vast political and lobbying operations. It makes
sobering and deeply disturbing reading. After all, it is one thing to
believe that out there somewhere the devil exists, but reading the CPI
report feels a little like being given his phone number.
The sums of money spent in furthering Koch (pronounced like the drink
coke, no matter how tempting it is to rhyme it with rock) interests and
power are staggering. But what is most disturbing is how rapidly they
are growing. In 2004, the CPI found, the Kochs spent a "mere" $857,000
on lobbying. In 2008, that had grown to $20m dollars. Over the next two
years, they then spent a further $20.5m.
The causes are varied but self-centred around the vital interests of
Koch Industries such as oil, energy, chemicals and financial products.
Employing no less than 30 lobbyists in Washington, Koch Industries has
lobbied to change more than 100 pieces of federal legislation. They
included trying to loosen regulations on potentially poisonous
substances like dioxins, benzene and asbestos. They have pushed back
against restrictions on carbon emissions and funded thinktanks and
groups that promote efforts to discredit climate change science. They
tried to soften attempts at financial reform where the Kochs operate in
the derivatives market. Wherever a law touched on a Koch corporate
interests, there were the company's lobbyists trying to gut, deaden or
defeat any attempt at regulation.
Fact:
<http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/112781/top-climate-change-denying-scient
ist-found-to-be-on-exxon-koch-brothers-payroll/>
Top Climate Change-Denying Scientist Found to Be on Exxon, Koch
BrothersÄ… Payroll
Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for
Astrophysics, was paid $1 million over 10 years to express the view that
CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming.
------
As with the tobacco companies, as long as fossil fuel extractors can
disseminate confusion, they can keep making money on tomorrows misery.
--
Welcome to the New America.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>
or
E Pluribus Unum
Next time vote Green Party
Ric Perry
Nov 25, 2012, 2:37:37 PM11/25/12
to
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:09:11 -0500, Way Back Jack
>
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:09:11 -0500, Way Back Jack
>
prosper, once they go begging to the north for water.
I guess we'll just need to rely on our ingenuity, use our guns to
steal it.
Farm1
Nov 25, 2012, 8:03:16 PM11/25/12
to
"Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
> your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
Billy the fact is you are playing with trolls. Just look at the number of
cross posts. If you must play with them can you take it out of our group?
> So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
> your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
cross posts. If you must play with them can you take it out of our group?
Higgs Boson
Nov 26, 2012, 12:19:26 AM11/26/12
to
On Nov 25, 11:27Â am, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> In article <KJSdnccsltn-KzjNnZ2dnUVZ_umdn...@giganews.com>,
> Brothers Payroll
HELP SOME TO GET THEIR HEADS STRAIGHT ABOUT THE COMING DANGER. BUT
THE WHORE SCIENTISTS LIKE THE ONE YOU MENTION WILL CONTINUE TO SPREAD
DISINFORMATION AT THE BEHEST OF BIG OIL, AND THE SHEEPLE WILL CONTINUE
TO BUY INTO IT BECAUSE IT'S EASIER TO DO NOTHING THAN TO FACE THE
TRUTH. SORT OF LIKE A CHILD CLOSING ITS EYES SO IT WON'T SEE THE
MONSTER IN THE ROOM.
WILLIE SOON, THE "SCIENTIST" YOU MENTIONED (does his employer know
what he does?) IS ONLY ONE OF THESE WHORE SCIENTISTS. A WHOLE
COTERIE HAVE BEEN FIELDED FOR DECADES BY THE GEORGE C. MARSHALL
INSTITUTE. THEIR JOB IS/WAS TO SPREAD DISINFORMATION ABOUT THE OZONE
HOLE, DDT, TOBACCO SMOKING, ACID RAIN -- ANYTHING THAT MIGHT CUT INTO
THE PROFITS OF THEIR MASTERS.
> In article <KJSdnccsltn-KzjNnZ2dnUVZ_umdn...@giganews.com>,
>
> Â linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> > Way Back Jack wrote:
> > > Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> > > cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> > > media?
>
> > Sure, right here.
>
> >http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aIMCxrhb91c/T3N9flvVBAI/AAAAAAAABdU/zsW892n...
> Â linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> > Way Back Jack wrote:
> > > Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> > > cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> > > media?
>
> > Sure, right here.
>
>
> Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for
> Astrophysics, was paid $1 million over 10 years to express the view that
> CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming.
> ------
>
> As with the tobacco companies, as long as fossil fuel extractors can
> disseminate confusion, they can keep making money on tomorrows misery.
>
> --
> Welcome to the New America.
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>
> or
> E Pluribus Unum
> Next time vote Green Party
BILLY, THANKS FOR YOUR WORK IN POSTING THIS INFORMATION. IT MIGHT
> Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for
> Astrophysics, was paid $1 million over 10 years to express the view that
> CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming.
> ------
>
> As with the tobacco companies, as long as fossil fuel extractors can
> disseminate confusion, they can keep making money on tomorrows misery.
>
> --
> Welcome to the New America.
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>
> or
> E Pluribus Unum
> Next time vote Green Party
HELP SOME TO GET THEIR HEADS STRAIGHT ABOUT THE COMING DANGER. BUT
THE WHORE SCIENTISTS LIKE THE ONE YOU MENTION WILL CONTINUE TO SPREAD
DISINFORMATION AT THE BEHEST OF BIG OIL, AND THE SHEEPLE WILL CONTINUE
TO BUY INTO IT BECAUSE IT'S EASIER TO DO NOTHING THAN TO FACE THE
TRUTH. SORT OF LIKE A CHILD CLOSING ITS EYES SO IT WON'T SEE THE
MONSTER IN THE ROOM.
WILLIE SOON, THE "SCIENTIST" YOU MENTIONED (does his employer know
what he does?) IS ONLY ONE OF THESE WHORE SCIENTISTS. A WHOLE
COTERIE HAVE BEEN FIELDED FOR DECADES BY THE GEORGE C. MARSHALL
INSTITUTE. THEIR JOB IS/WAS TO SPREAD DISINFORMATION ABOUT THE OZONE
HOLE, DDT, TOBACCO SMOKING, ACID RAIN -- ANYTHING THAT MIGHT CUT INTO
THE PROFITS OF THEIR MASTERS.
Billy
Nov 26, 2012, 12:29:37 AM11/26/12
to
Farm1
Nov 26, 2012, 4:30:47 AM11/26/12
to
"Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
news:wildbilly-1952C...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> In article <k8uf4h$37n$2...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
> wrote:
>
>> "Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>>
>> > So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
>> > your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
>>
>> Billy the fact is you are playing with trolls. Just look at the number
>> of
>> cross posts. If you must play with them can you take it out of our
>> group?
>
> Sure.
Good man. Thanks.
> wrote:
>
>> "Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>>
>> > So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
>> > your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
>>
>> Billy the fact is you are playing with trolls. Just look at the number
>> of
>> cross posts. If you must play with them can you take it out of our
>> group?
>
> Sure.
Way Back Jack
Nov 26, 2012, 6:17:32 AM11/26/12
to
socialist data to support more govt. control of peoples' freedom.
He probably also believes that comrade Obama is on the side of prosperity.
Jeanne Douglas
Nov 26, 2012, 4:48:33 PM11/26/12
to
In article <1doulu1ii3d0l$.pdfo93gq...@40tude.net>,
Well, there certainly has been a whole helluva lot of prosperity in his
1st 4 years, with most of the largest corporations (in the history of
the world) making record profits.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
1st 4 years, with most of the largest corporations (in the history of
the world) making record profits.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Farm1
Nov 26, 2012, 5:02:28 PM11/26/12
to
"Way Back Jack" <inv...@invalid.net> wrote in message
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:03:16 +1100, Farm1 wrote:
>> "Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>>
>>> So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
>>> your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
>>
>> Billy the fact is you are playing with trolls. Just look at the number
>> of
>> cross posts. If you must play with them can you take it out of our
>> group?
>
> Billy''s a fucking left-wing moonbat
And Billy, this "Way Back Jack" is the biggest troll and idiot of them all.
>> "Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
>>
>>> So, you use journalism, who want to sell advertising, as the basis of
>>> your information? You proudly declare victory, and ignore the FACTS.
>>
>> Billy the fact is you are playing with trolls. Just look at the number
>> of
>> cross posts. If you must play with them can you take it out of our
>> group?
>
> Billy''s a fucking left-wing moonbat
Way Back Jack
Nov 26, 2012, 6:24:15 PM11/26/12
to
supported by the dwindling work force, food stamps at record levels, a debt
that has destroyed the country....
Know what I be sayin'?
Jeanne Douglas
Nov 26, 2012, 7:46:35 PM11/26/12
to
In article <nlnvgehbfwn9.jajau0ggihm9$.d...@40tude.net>,
That has nothing to do with the prosperity of corporations.
Why would all of these corporations, who are making record profits with
small staffs whom they abuse with overwork and forced overtime, hire new
people?
Why would all of these corporations, who are making record profits with
small staffs whom they abuse with overwork and forced overtime, hire new
people?
Way Back Jack
Nov 26, 2012, 8:22:26 PM11/26/12
to
do when Obamacare hits: cutting people to less than 30 hrs. a week and
raising prices, for starters.
> Why would all of these corporations, who are making record profits with
> small staffs whom they abuse with overwork and forced overtime, hire new
> people?
goods, services, and jobs they provide.
You grow the cabbage and I'll grow the cantaloupe and we'll redistribute
according to need.
Jeanne Douglas
Nov 26, 2012, 10:14:21 PM11/26/12
to
In article <1fh1iuk3uw8zn$.1cw26boy3wsdu$.d...@40tude.net>,
I can see you're not interested in reality.
Way Back Jack
Nov 27, 2012, 6:28:18 AM11/27/12
to
How's it treatin' ya?
Billy
Nov 28, 2012, 2:16:23 AM11/28/12
to
Tunderbar
Nov 28, 2012, 10:22:14 AM11/28/12
to
On Nov 25, 1:27Â pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> In article <KJSdnccsltn-KzjNnZ2dnUVZ_umdn...@giganews.com>,
>
> In article <KJSdnccsltn-KzjNnZ2dnUVZ_umdn...@giganews.com>,
>
> Â linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> > Way Back Jack wrote:
> > > Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> > > cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> > > media?
>
> > Sure, right here.
>
> >http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aIMCxrhb91c/T3N9flvVBAI/AAAAAAAABdU/zsW892n...
> > Way Back Jack wrote:
> > > Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that scary
> > > cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the mainstream
> > > media?
>
> > Sure, right here.
>
>
> Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for
> Astrophysics, was paid $1 million over 10 years to express the view that
> CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming.
> ------
>
> As with the tobacco companies, as long as fossil fuel extractors can
> disseminate confusion, they can keep making money on tomorrows misery.
>
> --
> Welcome to the New America.
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>
> or
> E Pluribus Unum
> Next time vote Green Party
Wow. facts by Wikipedia and left wing mags. You win, I'm convinced. We
> Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for
> Astrophysics, was paid $1 million over 10 years to express the view that
> CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming.
> ------
>
> As with the tobacco companies, as long as fossil fuel extractors can
> disseminate confusion, they can keep making money on tomorrows misery.
>
> --
> Welcome to the New America.
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>
> or
> E Pluribus Unum
> Next time vote Green Party
can shut down the debate and this ng now.
harry k
Nov 28, 2012, 10:27:56 AM11/28/12
to
change them.
Harry K
Way Back Jack
Nov 28, 2012, 11:54:22 AM11/28/12
to
apolitically-motivated climatologists don't buy into the alarmism. Many
others say that the science isn't settled yet as to whether the problem is
anthropomorphic.
Why you using a PC? Your carbon footprint would be smaller if ya didn't.
You taking a bicycle to and from work or the unemployment place as the case
may be? Your home is powered by windmills and solar, of course.
Higgs Boson
Nov 28, 2012, 12:23:31 PM11/28/12
to
A few comments: First, you want ""änthropogenic" rather than
""änthropomorphic"".
Next, quoting you:
** Many others say that the science isn't settled yet as to whether
the problem is
anthropomorphic. **
(a) It isn't ""many""; it's a tiny few whore scientists recruited by
arch-reactionary think tanks like the Marshall Institute. They are
well paid to cast doubt into the "minds" of the well-meaning but
ignorant sheeple as to the validity of anthropogenic global warming.
The Marshall Institute and think tanks like it, pulled the same scam
about major dangers like acid rain, DDT, tobacco, ozone hole, etc.
Their mission -- and they are generously funded by, for just one,
Exxon Mobil -- is to continue making as much money as possible as fast
as possible before the public wakes up.
Eventually the U.S. did wake up to the dangers of acid rain, DDT,
tobacco, and the ozone hole. But it took decads -- FAR FAR too long
to overcome the greedy manipulations of these exploiters.
You can easily check every word of this; the sources are available on-
line.
[...]
HB
Frank
Nov 28, 2012, 1:02:27 PM11/28/12
to
himself ;)
Way Back Jack
Nov 28, 2012, 1:11:18 PM11/28/12
to
graves.
> (a) It isn't ""many""; it's a tiny few whore scientists recruited by
> arch-reactionary think tanks like the Marshall Institute. They are
> well paid to cast doubt into the "minds" of the well-meaning but
> ignorant sheeple as to the validity of anthropogenic global warming.
> The Marshall Institute and think tanks like it, pulled the same scam
> about major dangers like acid rain, DDT, tobacco, ozone hole, etc.
> Their mission -- and they are generously funded by, for just one,
> Exxon Mobil -- is to continue making as much money as possible as fast
> as possible before the public wakes up.
ruling elite. They know who butters their bread as to grants, etc.
The ruling elite since 1960 has been left.
We're often asked who could possibly benefit from a global warming "hoax".
The answer is many people, from an ex-Vice President to the head of the
UN's IPCC to every scientist receiving grant money to research it. Now
"carbon credits" are traded in Europe so anyone can join in on the fun.
> Eventually the U.S. did wake up to the dangers of acid rain, DDT,
> tobacco, and the ozone hole. But it took decads -- FAR FAR too long
> to overcome the greedy manipulations of these exploiters.
recent decades ago?
DDT? Yes, the mosquitos and other creepy critters in the 3rd world are now
thriving and infecting the peeps in record numbers.
Tobacco? Any dipshit who inhaled one drag from a cigarette and didn't know
it would be harmful is brain dead.
Something tells me that you take a kinder approach to reefer, tho.
> You can easily check every word of this; the sources are available on-
> line.
>
> [...]
>
> HB
Missing will be any mention of Phil Jones' shenanigans.
Farm1
Nov 28, 2012, 7:58:14 PM11/28/12
to
"Frank" <frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
Sadly Billy still seems to believe that people can be convinced by logic and
facts. The US seems to have become infested with luddites who are incapable
of recognising either of those things.
facts. The US seems to have become infested with luddites who are incapable
of recognising either of those things.
David Hare-Scott
Nov 29, 2012, 1:42:00 AM11/29/12
to
Do not try to dispel beliefs gained by non-rational means with rational
ones, it won't work.
D
Higgs Boson
Nov 29, 2012, 3:24:59 PM11/29/12
to
Have stripped them out, with apologies to rec. gardens.
Class, this is a textbook illustration of the ignoble craft of cherry
picking.
As soon as you see "left-wing" in a communication, you KNOW it's
coming from somebody who has a bad case of determination bias.
One can only feel compassion -- and anger -- for helpless victims of
such a mentality.
HB
Farm1
Nov 29, 2012, 5:04:09 PM11/29/12
to
"Higgs Boson" <hypa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ab151d18-2a6a-43e1...@s6g2000pby.googlegroups.com...
_____________________________
Yep. Nicely put.
news:ab151d18-2a6a-43e1...@s6g2000pby.googlegroups.com...
Yep. Nicely put.
Mamma Wesolowski
Nov 29, 2012, 7:23:31 PM11/29/12
to
Way Back Jack <inv...@invalid.net> wrote in
news:1jq9ukg4tohd8$.1xkoxq6eo12x8$.d...@40tude.net:
> Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that
> scary cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the
retired SSD worker who has a decade-long reputation on the Usenet as a
crass, foul-mouthed bigot, racist, liar, spammer and
troll.
A recent ode to psychopath Jack Wesolowski, from rec.sport.boxing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.boxing/msg/336baad3954b6f51?...
http://tinyurl.com/7ldhq3b
"Way Back Jack, his mother licks my crack,
Then she sucks my dick until it's yellah.
An' his mother-fuckin' fathah doesn't so much as bother
To use some spittle when he's bung-holin' little
Boys, before they're rollin' in the shower, their 'nads all a'
swollen,
While our perverted faggot Jack laps up all their bloody turds.
He's a real low-life fellah, whose perversion escapes mere words
And one from alt.native, May 4, 2002.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.native/msg/0f12476019613f13?dmode=...
http://tinyurl.com/6ugweze
Brother Jack is a racist bigot
His mouth is a toxic old spigot
He spews out his hate
He never can wait
To find some more dolts who will dig it!
We know a white jerk named Jack
Who really wants to be black
He calls himself "brother"
Wears clothes from his mother(*)
The truth is he's just a hack
We see his rantings as racist bile
His words typically ugly and vile
The master of hate
Thank God he won't mate
Let us leave him alone for awhile
(*)
Jack Wesolowski, circa 2000
http://tinyurl.com/3dtnmpz
Meet Psychopath Jack Wesolowski, the crass, foul-mouthed, bigot,
racist, liar, spammer and troll.
Jack Wesolowski the spammer
http://tinyurl.com/3o7su5k
Jack Wesolowski the troll.
http://tinyurl.com/6ynlegl
http://tinyurl.com/5vljxag
http://tinyurl.com/3nukkeo
Jack Wesolowsk the liar.
http://tinyurl.com/6hr3lmq
http://tinyurl.com/44x4ceg
Jack Wesolowski the bigot.
http://tinyurl.com/3n5z48d
http://tinyurl.com/3h2sc48
Jack Wesolowski the racist.
http://tinyurl.com/3m3vhjb
http://tinyurl.com/3qoolnh
http://tinyurl.com/3j8gnfm
http://tinyurl.com/3c97kg7
Jack Wesolowski, aka
Bob Cain (resurrected)
joe momma
farting boar
diane roselles
dr jackal
Repeal Obama
Mothzer Roselles
Xavier
Amber Travsky
Vladimir Tschenko Badenovsky
Off the moonbat
A liberal's worst nightmare
Swatting Moonbatz
Ruth Chilton
That Sleazy Cunt Piglosi
Obama Nation is Abomination
ObamaNation=Abomination
Let it Rock
Nobama
Repeal Obama
Mother Roselles
Swatting Moonbatz
Amber Travsky
Gary Sokolisch
Weary Bruiser 1 reti...@home.net
Vladimir Badenovsky
Mike Gibson's Ghost
Gary Sokolosch
Gary Sakolich
THE REAL GARY
GARY IN ANIMAL RESEARCH
GARY THE "ENGINEER"
Calhoun
Bobby Fuller
Calhoon
Jack (windswept@home.)
JackW (windswept@home)
Windswept@home. (jack)
BroJack
Bro Jack
brojac...@my-deja.com
waybackjack
way back jack
jackweso
JackWesolowski
jackw...@email.msn.com (brojac...@my-deja.com)
Jack Wesolowski (wesolow...@freewwweb.com)
BroJ...@windswept.net (BroJack)
Windswept@Home (Jack W)
jackw...@email.msn.com (brojac...@my-deja.com)
Jack from waaaayyyyyBack
John F Wesolowski
3045 Old Washington Rd
Westminster, MD 21157
(410) 876-6914
http://tinyurl.com/6cv8t2e
news:1jq9ukg4tohd8$.1xkoxq6eo12x8$.d...@40tude.net:
> Thirty-years ago, we entered the "new ice age." Do you remember that
> scary cover of Time magazine and all the horrors predicted by the
> mainstream media? But a miraculous thing happened .... global warmth.
> Someone from up above heard our prayers and I for one am ecstatic.
> Anyone in his right mind should be. Anyone in his right mind prefers
> unseasonable warmth to freezing his ass off.
>
> Thank you to the powers above and to all those who prayed along with
> me to be delivered from the "new ice age."
>
That's my boy Jack "Shitwad" Wesolowski, a 68-year old, mentally-ill,
> Someone from up above heard our prayers and I for one am ecstatic.
> Anyone in his right mind should be. Anyone in his right mind prefers
> unseasonable warmth to freezing his ass off.
>
> Thank you to the powers above and to all those who prayed along with
> me to be delivered from the "new ice age."
>
retired SSD worker who has a decade-long reputation on the Usenet as a
crass, foul-mouthed bigot, racist, liar, spammer and
troll.
A recent ode to psychopath Jack Wesolowski, from rec.sport.boxing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.boxing/msg/336baad3954b6f51?...
http://tinyurl.com/7ldhq3b
"Way Back Jack, his mother licks my crack,
Then she sucks my dick until it's yellah.
An' his mother-fuckin' fathah doesn't so much as bother
To use some spittle when he's bung-holin' little
Boys, before they're rollin' in the shower, their 'nads all a'
swollen,
While our perverted faggot Jack laps up all their bloody turds.
He's a real low-life fellah, whose perversion escapes mere words
And one from alt.native, May 4, 2002.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.native/msg/0f12476019613f13?dmode=...
http://tinyurl.com/6ugweze
Brother Jack is a racist bigot
His mouth is a toxic old spigot
He spews out his hate
He never can wait
To find some more dolts who will dig it!
We know a white jerk named Jack
Who really wants to be black
He calls himself "brother"
Wears clothes from his mother(*)
The truth is he's just a hack
We see his rantings as racist bile
His words typically ugly and vile
The master of hate
Thank God he won't mate
Let us leave him alone for awhile
(*)
Jack Wesolowski, circa 2000
http://tinyurl.com/3dtnmpz
Meet Psychopath Jack Wesolowski, the crass, foul-mouthed, bigot,
racist, liar, spammer and troll.
Jack Wesolowski the spammer
http://tinyurl.com/3o7su5k
Jack Wesolowski the troll.
http://tinyurl.com/6ynlegl
http://tinyurl.com/5vljxag
http://tinyurl.com/3nukkeo
Jack Wesolowsk the liar.
http://tinyurl.com/6hr3lmq
http://tinyurl.com/44x4ceg
Jack Wesolowski the bigot.
http://tinyurl.com/3n5z48d
http://tinyurl.com/3h2sc48
Jack Wesolowski the racist.
http://tinyurl.com/3m3vhjb
http://tinyurl.com/3qoolnh
http://tinyurl.com/3j8gnfm
http://tinyurl.com/3c97kg7
Jack Wesolowski, aka
Bob Cain (resurrected)
joe momma
farting boar
diane roselles
dr jackal
Repeal Obama
Mothzer Roselles
Xavier
Amber Travsky
Vladimir Tschenko Badenovsky
Off the moonbat
A liberal's worst nightmare
Swatting Moonbatz
Ruth Chilton
That Sleazy Cunt Piglosi
Obama Nation is Abomination
ObamaNation=Abomination
Let it Rock
Nobama
Repeal Obama
Mother Roselles
Swatting Moonbatz
Amber Travsky
Gary Sokolisch
Weary Bruiser 1 reti...@home.net
Vladimir Badenovsky
Mike Gibson's Ghost
Gary Sokolosch
Gary Sakolich
THE REAL GARY
GARY IN ANIMAL RESEARCH
GARY THE "ENGINEER"
Calhoun
Bobby Fuller
Calhoon
Jack (windswept@home.)
JackW (windswept@home)
Windswept@home. (jack)
BroJack
Bro Jack
brojac...@my-deja.com
waybackjack
way back jack
jackweso
JackWesolowski
jackw...@email.msn.com (brojac...@my-deja.com)
Jack Wesolowski (wesolow...@freewwweb.com)
BroJ...@windswept.net (BroJack)
Windswept@Home (Jack W)
jackw...@email.msn.com (brojac...@my-deja.com)
Jack from waaaayyyyyBack
John F Wesolowski
3045 Old Washington Rd
Westminster, MD 21157
(410) 876-6914
http://tinyurl.com/6cv8t2e
Billy
Dec 1, 2012, 10:02:55 PM12/1/12
to
In article <k98m50$613$2...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
wrote:
as "Left Wing", but he fails to respond to citations given, and he
submits no rebuttal, except for his opinions. Need it be mentioned that
fossil fuel extractors, like the Koch brothers spend millions of dollars
trying to influence people to write to their news papers in what is
called astro-turf populism?
wrote:
> Class, this is a textbook illustration of the ignoble craft of cherry
> picking.
>
> As soon as you see "left-wing" in a communication, you KNOW it's
> coming from somebody who has a bad case of determination bias.
>
> One can only feel compassion -- and anger -- for helpless victims of
> such a mentality.
> _____________________________
> Yep. Nicely put.
Yeah, this knuckle dragger disparages information that he doesn't like
> picking.
>
> As soon as you see "left-wing" in a communication, you KNOW it's
> coming from somebody who has a bad case of determination bias.
>
> One can only feel compassion -- and anger -- for helpless victims of
> such a mentality.
> _____________________________
> Yep. Nicely put.
as "Left Wing", but he fails to respond to citations given, and he
submits no rebuttal, except for his opinions. Need it be mentioned that
fossil fuel extractors, like the Koch brothers spend millions of dollars
trying to influence people to write to their news papers in what is
called astro-turf populism?
Farm1
Dec 3, 2012, 12:31:39 AM12/3/12
to
"Billy" <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> In article <k98m50$613$2...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1"
>> Yep. Nicely put.
>
> Yeah, this knuckle dragger disparages information that he doesn't like
> as "Left Wing", but he fails to respond to citations given, and he
> submits no rebuttal, except for his opinions.
Yup. I've seen him around before this instance and he does that all the
>
> Yeah, this knuckle dragger disparages information that he doesn't like
> as "Left Wing", but he fails to respond to citations given, and he
> submits no rebuttal, except for his opinions.
time.
Frank.Logullo
Dec 3, 2012, 1:14:21 PM12/3/12
to
Gee, how did you figure that out? ;)
A Voice of Freedom
Dec 4, 2012, 12:56:36 AM12/4/12
to
"Frank.Logullo" <frankdo...@comcast.net> wrote :
STOP GLOBAL WARMING!...
NO, STOP GLOBAL COOLING!...
NO, STOP CLIMATE FROM CHANGING EITHER WAY!
Well if you can't do any, or all of those things, at least find other ways to
redistribute wealth!
NO, STOP GLOBAL COOLING!...
NO, STOP CLIMATE FROM CHANGING EITHER WAY!
Well if you can't do any, or all of those things, at least find other ways to
redistribute wealth!
Billy
Dec 10, 2012, 1:49:04 AM12/10/12
to
In article <XnsA11EE964...@216.196.121.131>,
<http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
let�s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
world, because it involves sharing the ecological space of the world,
the common atmospheric space, but because emissions of carbon dioxide
are linked to economic growth, it is also about sharing the economic
space of the world. So, in some senses, climate change is a tough issue,
because we are telling nations that this is the right to development of
all. And that�s been the issue for now many years that has been on the
table, where there are countries that have overused their share, there
quota, if you would say, of the earth�s atmospheric space, and there are
countries who need the right to development. And that�s been the tension
that we have seen.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States>
Americans have the highest income inequality in the rich world and over
the past 20�30 years Americans have also experienced the greatest
increase in income inequality among rich nations. The more detailed the
data we can use to observe this change, the more skewed the change
appears to be... the majority of large gains are indeed at the top of
the distribution.
----
The U.S. government helped the investment banks to the tune of $14
trillion dollars when they said that they were broke. They didn't help
home buyers so much.
The U.S. government has spent trillions of dollars fighting a few
thousand guys with rags on their heads for the last 11 years, even
though the U.S. spends more than the next 15 countries combined.
Incompetence, or greed? You decide.
The U.S. paid the fossil fuel extractors some $14 billion dollars last
year, even as they were making record profits. Does that make sense to
you?
If we want our money back, for education, infrastructure, or health
care, we should go to where the money went.
let�s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
world, because it involves sharing the ecological space of the world,
the common atmospheric space, but because emissions of carbon dioxide
are linked to economic growth, it is also about sharing the economic
space of the world. So, in some senses, climate change is a tough issue,
because we are telling nations that this is the right to development of
all. And that�s been the issue for now many years that has been on the
table, where there are countries that have overused their share, there
quota, if you would say, of the earth�s atmospheric space, and there are
countries who need the right to development. And that�s been the tension
that we have seen.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States>
Americans have the highest income inequality in the rich world and over
the past 20�30 years Americans have also experienced the greatest
increase in income inequality among rich nations. The more detailed the
data we can use to observe this change, the more skewed the change
appears to be... the majority of large gains are indeed at the top of
the distribution.
----
The U.S. government helped the investment banks to the tune of $14
trillion dollars when they said that they were broke. They didn't help
home buyers so much.
The U.S. government has spent trillions of dollars fighting a few
thousand guys with rags on their heads for the last 11 years, even
though the U.S. spends more than the next 15 countries combined.
Incompetence, or greed? You decide.
The U.S. paid the fossil fuel extractors some $14 billion dollars last
year, even as they were making record profits. Does that make sense to
you?
If we want our money back, for education, infrastructure, or health
care, we should go to where the money went.
Frank
Dec 10, 2012, 8:40:39 AM12/10/12
to
Billy
Dec 12, 2012, 1:19:54 AM12/12/12
to
In article <ka4oom$7b0$2...@dont-email.me>,
Maybe you should move your investments out of petrochemicals, Frank.
Farm1
Dec 12, 2012, 6:50:08 PM12/12/12
to
Jane Galt
Dec 20, 2012, 1:33:23 AM12/20/12
to
><http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
> let零 be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
> world,
Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
Farm1
Dec 20, 2012, 4:44:53 AM12/20/12
to
"Jane Galt" <Ja...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>><http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
>> let�s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
>><http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
>> let�s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
>> world,
>
> Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
> redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
School holidays seem to have started early.
>
> Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
> redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
Dick Adams
Dec 20, 2012, 3:17:50 PM12/20/12
to
Jane Galt <Ja...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
> Someone else wrote:
>> <http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
>> let?s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
about redistribution of wealth and power. Climate change is very real.
The problem is that fiscal liberals want you to believe that the
change is caused by human behavior.
Keep in mind: Fiscal liberals are liars who teach their children how to lie.
> Someone else wrote:
>> <http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
>> let?s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
>> world,
> Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
> redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
Close, but no cigar. Socialist politics aka Fiscal Liberalism is all
> Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
> redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
about redistribution of wealth and power. Climate change is very real.
The problem is that fiscal liberals want you to believe that the
change is caused by human behavior.
Keep in mind: Fiscal liberals are liars who teach their children how to lie.
Frank
Dec 20, 2012, 3:26:00 PM12/20/12
to
Frank
Dec 20, 2012, 4:00:07 PM12/20/12
to
>>> The U.S. government has spent trillions of dollars fighting a few
>>> thousand guys with rags on their heads for the last 11 years, even
>>> though the U.S. spends more than the next 15 countries combined.
>>> Incompetence, or greed? You decide.
>>>
>>> The U.S. paid the fossil fuel extractors some $14 billion dollars last
>>> year, even as they were making record profits. Does that make sense to
>>> you?
>>>
>>> If we want our money back, for education, infrastructure, or health
>>> care, we should go to where the money went.
>>>
>>
>> Nitwit. Do you think we read all your rants?
>
> Well clearly YOU just did!
>
>
Nope. Just scrolled down to harass him ;)
>>> thousand guys with rags on their heads for the last 11 years, even
>>> though the U.S. spends more than the next 15 countries combined.
>>> Incompetence, or greed? You decide.
>>>
>>> The U.S. paid the fossil fuel extractors some $14 billion dollars last
>>> year, even as they were making record profits. Does that make sense to
>>> you?
>>>
>>> If we want our money back, for education, infrastructure, or health
>>> care, we should go to where the money went.
>>>
>>
>> Nitwit. Do you think we read all your rants?
>
> Well clearly YOU just did!
>
>
David Hare-Scott
Dec 20, 2012, 4:56:39 PM12/20/12
to
> Keep in mind: Fiscal liberals are liars who teach their children how
> to lie.
You know you are dealing with a religious issue when either side cannot
> to lie.
accept that their opposition acts in good faith and must be liars. But this
is how the climate change debate is conducted in the USA. Pile on as much
emotion and as few facts as possible, a tale told by an idiot, full of
sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Happy Solstice.
D
Farm1
Dec 20, 2012, 11:22:03 PM12/20/12
to
"David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:kb01j1$5cu$1...@news.albasani.net...
It's something that really does irritate me because it makes it so much
harder to correct or castigate people when they apply the usual stereotype
to Americans.
> Happy Solstice.
And to you and yours David.
news:kb01j1$5cu$1...@news.albasani.net...
harder to correct or castigate people when they apply the usual stereotype
to Americans.
> Happy Solstice.
And to you and yours David.
Message has been deleted
Jane Galt
Dec 24, 2012, 3:02:08 PM12/24/12
to
"David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote :
Has nothing to do with the fact that government FUNDED weather organizations
were lying with their data, we may actually be entering a period of global
cooling, and the climate has been changing for billions of years!
In fact there were periods in Europe when thet couldn't even grow crops and
were all starving, BEFORE modern carbon emissions!
were lying with their data, we may actually be entering a period of global
cooling, and the climate has been changing for billions of years!
In fact there were periods in Europe when thet couldn't even grow crops and
were all starving, BEFORE modern carbon emissions!
Jane Galt
Dec 24, 2012, 3:08:03 PM12/24/12
to
Rick <n...@spam.please> wrote :
> There are a lot of climate change deniers in myriad countries- even
> some Bengali's who are already wading up to their navels.
Oh? Are those the people who live on islands that are 3 feet above sea
level and flood whenever the weather gets stormy? The ones who are
cynically being used as poster children by the MMGW - "Man Made Global
Warming" whackos?
> There is no climate debate in America. It must be very difficult for
> those on the outside looking in to come to grips with Americas
> religiosity and how it impacts our politics. To a coal miner in West
> Virginia, with no other reasonable source of income, God put that coal
> in the ground for him to dig up.
>
Yes, and if the liberals REALLY gave a crap about anything BUT Marxist
redistribution of wealth:
"There is enough nuclear fuel to last far longer than man will inhabit the
earth." - Physics Professor Emeritus Dr. Howard Hayden, author of The
Energy Advocate
ALL SAFE AND CLEAN, WITH MODERN PRE-PACKAGED PLANT DESIGNS.
But of course the liberals hate everything human and no energy solution is
acceptable. We all must revert to naked savages picking berries in the
fields, for these whackos to be happy!
> some Bengali's who are already wading up to their navels.
Oh? Are those the people who live on islands that are 3 feet above sea
level and flood whenever the weather gets stormy? The ones who are
cynically being used as poster children by the MMGW - "Man Made Global
Warming" whackos?
> There is no climate debate in America. It must be very difficult for
> those on the outside looking in to come to grips with Americas
> religiosity and how it impacts our politics. To a coal miner in West
> Virginia, with no other reasonable source of income, God put that coal
> in the ground for him to dig up.
>
Yes, and if the liberals REALLY gave a crap about anything BUT Marxist
redistribution of wealth:
"There is enough nuclear fuel to last far longer than man will inhabit the
earth." - Physics Professor Emeritus Dr. Howard Hayden, author of The
Energy Advocate
ALL SAFE AND CLEAN, WITH MODERN PRE-PACKAGED PLANT DESIGNS.
But of course the liberals hate everything human and no energy solution is
acceptable. We all must revert to naked savages picking berries in the
fields, for these whackos to be happy!
David Hare-Scott
Dec 24, 2012, 3:52:01 PM12/24/12
to
producing more examples as I understood you the first time. You pretend
that you are somehow saying something about climate change, all you are
doing is hurling political slogans at your imagined opposition. A waste of
typing.
D
David Hare-Scott
Dec 24, 2012, 4:08:34 PM12/24/12
to
to illustrate the situation. I want to do this for the practical purpose of
avoiding going on until next Christmas. Unless you want to play a game of
'whackamole' where each time I knock one down you pop up another from the
limitless supply of the contrarian lobby.
If I give you a rundown of the errors and fact and argument in the above
will you stick to the those points?
D
Dick Adams
Dec 24, 2012, 8:34:23 PM12/24/12
to
David Hare-Scott <sec...@nospam.com> wrote:
Mr. Hare-Scott did not fully quote me. I was responding to someone who
was claiming climate was hocus pocus and it went like this:
>> <http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
>> let?s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
>> world,
> Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
> redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
Close, but no cigar. Socialist politics aka Fiscal Liberalism is all
about redistribution of wealth and power. Climate change is very real.
The problem is that fiscal liberals want you to believe that the
change is caused by human behavior.
was claiming climate was hocus pocus and it went like this:
>> <http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/7/the_most_obdurate_bully_in_the>
>> let?s be very clear. Climate change is such a difficult issue for the
>> world,
> Not really, it's bullshit pseudo "science" being used for socialist
> redistribution of wealth and power. See? How simple is THAT?!
Close, but no cigar. Socialist politics aka Fiscal Liberalism is all
about redistribution of wealth and power. Climate change is very real.
The problem is that fiscal liberals want you to believe that the
change is caused by human behavior.
Message has been deleted
Billy
Dec 27, 2012, 7:59:41 PM12/27/12
to
In article <XnsA133849B03AB8Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
I don't remember seeing you in the group before, welcome.
Just a note. If you want to assert something is a fact, you can buttress
it with a citation indicating where it can be found, and what
authorities support it.
For example:
<http://scienceprogressaction.org/intersection/2012/01/on-global-warming-
should-you-trust-the-wall-street-journal-or-chevron-exxonmobil-and-the-de
fense-department/>
As of January 2012, several of the major global petroleum producers have
publicly acknowledged the negative effects of greenhouse gases on
Earth�s atmosphere and undertaken steps to reduce CO2 emissions. Below
are a few quotes directly copied from their websites:
BP: �Current forecasts underscore the size of the climate change
challenge. BP�s analysis suggests that CO2 emissions could rise by at
least 27% by 2030, despite expected tightening in global climate policy.
Even assuming that more aggressive policy changes are enacted, carbon
emissions are likely to rise by up to 9% by 2030. We support policies
that we believe can address climate change while also making it possible
for society to meet growing demand for secure and affordable energy.�
ExxonMobil: �Rising greenhouse-gas emissions pose significant risks
to society and ecosystems. Since most of these emissions are
energy-related, any integrated approach to meeting the world�s growing
energy needs over the coming decades must incorporate strategies to
address the risk of climate change.�
Chevron: �We recognize and share the concerns of governments and the
public about climate change. The use of fossil fuels to meet the world�s
energy needs is a contributor to an increase in greenhouse gases
(GHGs)�mainly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane�in the Earth�s
atmosphere. There is a widespread view that this increase is leading to
climate change, with adverse effects on the environment.�
----
The article also mentions that the DoD is also preparing for global
climate change.
----
OK folks, start your grow lights, and get to gardening.
Just a note. If you want to assert something is a fact, you can buttress
it with a citation indicating where it can be found, and what
authorities support it.
For example:
<http://scienceprogressaction.org/intersection/2012/01/on-global-warming-
should-you-trust-the-wall-street-journal-or-chevron-exxonmobil-and-the-de
fense-department/>
As of January 2012, several of the major global petroleum producers have
publicly acknowledged the negative effects of greenhouse gases on
Earth�s atmosphere and undertaken steps to reduce CO2 emissions. Below
are a few quotes directly copied from their websites:
BP: �Current forecasts underscore the size of the climate change
challenge. BP�s analysis suggests that CO2 emissions could rise by at
least 27% by 2030, despite expected tightening in global climate policy.
Even assuming that more aggressive policy changes are enacted, carbon
emissions are likely to rise by up to 9% by 2030. We support policies
that we believe can address climate change while also making it possible
for society to meet growing demand for secure and affordable energy.�
ExxonMobil: �Rising greenhouse-gas emissions pose significant risks
to society and ecosystems. Since most of these emissions are
energy-related, any integrated approach to meeting the world�s growing
energy needs over the coming decades must incorporate strategies to
address the risk of climate change.�
Chevron: �We recognize and share the concerns of governments and the
public about climate change. The use of fossil fuels to meet the world�s
energy needs is a contributor to an increase in greenhouse gases
(GHGs)�mainly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane�in the Earth�s
atmosphere. There is a widespread view that this increase is leading to
climate change, with adverse effects on the environment.�
----
The article also mentions that the DoD is also preparing for global
climate change.
----
OK folks, start your grow lights, and get to gardening.
Billy
Dec 27, 2012, 10:09:01 PM12/27/12
to
In article <XnsA133859C36A00Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
songbird
Dec 30, 2012, 11:53:32 PM12/30/12
to
Billy wrote:
...
one plan puts clean up at 40 years.
if i were an older person without children
it wouldn't make that much difference as
hot spots can be detected and cleaned up
before a garden could be used.
for younger people who are hoping to
have children i'd wait...
right now with the plant still being
a possible source of more leaks it is too
risky to be too close. i wouldn't want
to be any place within 10 miles in general
and probably further away if it were down
wind of prevailing winds.
still, the country of Japan with such
limited land area it would make more sense
to get on top of this sooner rather than
later to get the land back into production.
i'm a bit more worried about what has been
and might be still dumped into the sea. a
contaminated fish can swim a long ways before
being caught.
songbird
...
> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
depends upon who and where.
> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
one plan puts clean up at 40 years.
if i were an older person without children
it wouldn't make that much difference as
hot spots can be detected and cleaned up
before a garden could be used.
for younger people who are hoping to
have children i'd wait...
right now with the plant still being
a possible source of more leaks it is too
risky to be too close. i wouldn't want
to be any place within 10 miles in general
and probably further away if it were down
wind of prevailing winds.
still, the country of Japan with such
limited land area it would make more sense
to get on top of this sooner rather than
later to get the land back into production.
i'm a bit more worried about what has been
and might be still dumped into the sea. a
contaminated fish can swim a long ways before
being caught.
songbird
Billy
Jan 1, 2013, 1:29:10 AM1/1/13
to
In article <cbi7r9-...@ID-306963.user.uni-berlin.de>,
I was thinking of farmers, not gardeners, Bird. Yeah, ma, and pa may be
too old to worry about getting cancer in 20 years, but farmers sell to
the full spectrum of society from geezers to those who are pregnant. All
the released radiation will have a statistical effect on large
populations, and devastating effects on those affected, for generations
to come.
The newly elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, said that he will
seek to build new nuclear reactors, which will be completely different
from those at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. I guess the
acid test is whether the private companies, like Tokyo Electric Power
Co., will take responsibility for insuring their nuclear power plants
for public liability, or will they depend on the government, as here in
the U.S., to cover their liabilities.
Been having line problems with my DSL, so while I have the opportunity,
I'd like to wish all you gardeners a Happy New Year.
too old to worry about getting cancer in 20 years, but farmers sell to
the full spectrum of society from geezers to those who are pregnant. All
the released radiation will have a statistical effect on large
populations, and devastating effects on those affected, for generations
to come.
The newly elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, said that he will
seek to build new nuclear reactors, which will be completely different
from those at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. I guess the
acid test is whether the private companies, like Tokyo Electric Power
Co., will take responsibility for insuring their nuclear power plants
for public liability, or will they depend on the government, as here in
the U.S., to cover their liabilities.
Been having line problems with my DSL, so while I have the opportunity,
I'd like to wish all you gardeners a Happy New Year.
songbird
Jan 2, 2013, 8:03:28 PM1/2/13
to
Billy wrote:
area may have enough radioactive particles as to
make the topsoil unsafe for workers or anyone
who might ingest the dust. other spots may not
be so much that it would be all that different
from background radiation levels of any volcanic
origin.
and the fun part is that it really depends upon
not only how much radiation is there but what kind
of particles are giving off the radiation. some
particles will be made up of elements that will
decay within a few years time. others are going
to be there for ever.
for the worst areas they could take the top
layer of soil and invert it so that it is
below the most biologically active zone (depends
upon frost/thaw cycles and the fauna that moves
soils). more moderate to lightly contaminated
areas are likely too expensive to cleanup and
could be turned with a deep plow and then used
without too much of a problem.
ok, so to go a little further you have to also
look at each plant species to see what they take
up. some will not take up much at all. turn the
soil deep enough and plant shallow rooted plants
and that could easily cover 90-99% of the area
affected for not much $. the rest of the 10-1%
is where the big $ will be spent and much of it
will be wasted.
> The newly elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, said that he will
> seek to build new nuclear reactors, which will be completely different
> from those at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. I guess the
> acid test is whether the private companies, like Tokyo Electric Power
> Co., will take responsibility for insuring their nuclear power plants
> for public liability, or will they depend on the government, as here in
> the U.S., to cover their liabilities.
i hope the design is safe and they don't build the
things close to the ocean, fault lines or other populated
areas... which for Japan pretty much rules out all of it.
> Been having line problems with my DSL, so while I have the opportunity,
> I'd like to wish all you gardeners a Happy New Year.
thanks! it's been a riot so far.
songbird
> I was thinking of farmers, not gardeners, Bird. Yeah, ma, and pa may be
> too old to worry about getting cancer in 20 years, but farmers sell to
> the full spectrum of society from geezers to those who are pregnant. All
> the released radiation will have a statistical effect on large
> populations, and devastating effects on those affected, for generations
> to come.
this really depends. like i said above. one
> too old to worry about getting cancer in 20 years, but farmers sell to
> the full spectrum of society from geezers to those who are pregnant. All
> the released radiation will have a statistical effect on large
> populations, and devastating effects on those affected, for generations
> to come.
area may have enough radioactive particles as to
make the topsoil unsafe for workers or anyone
who might ingest the dust. other spots may not
be so much that it would be all that different
from background radiation levels of any volcanic
origin.
and the fun part is that it really depends upon
not only how much radiation is there but what kind
of particles are giving off the radiation. some
particles will be made up of elements that will
decay within a few years time. others are going
to be there for ever.
for the worst areas they could take the top
layer of soil and invert it so that it is
below the most biologically active zone (depends
upon frost/thaw cycles and the fauna that moves
soils). more moderate to lightly contaminated
areas are likely too expensive to cleanup and
could be turned with a deep plow and then used
without too much of a problem.
ok, so to go a little further you have to also
look at each plant species to see what they take
up. some will not take up much at all. turn the
soil deep enough and plant shallow rooted plants
and that could easily cover 90-99% of the area
affected for not much $. the rest of the 10-1%
is where the big $ will be spent and much of it
will be wasted.
> The newly elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, said that he will
> seek to build new nuclear reactors, which will be completely different
> from those at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. I guess the
> acid test is whether the private companies, like Tokyo Electric Power
> Co., will take responsibility for insuring their nuclear power plants
> for public liability, or will they depend on the government, as here in
> the U.S., to cover their liabilities.
things close to the ocean, fault lines or other populated
areas... which for Japan pretty much rules out all of it.
> Been having line problems with my DSL, so while I have the opportunity,
> I'd like to wish all you gardeners a Happy New Year.
songbird
David Hare-Scott
Jan 10, 2013, 5:41:11 AM1/10/13
to
D
Jane Galt
Apr 26, 2013, 6:58:14 PM4/26/13
to
Jane Galt
Apr 26, 2013, 6:59:44 PM4/26/13
to
Jane Galt
Apr 26, 2013, 7:00:40 PM4/26/13
to
Jane Galt
Apr 26, 2013, 7:02:05 PM4/26/13
to
Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>
> The newly elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, said that he will
> seek to build new nuclear reactors, which will be completely different
> from those at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
Yeah, that was a 70's technology plant, under conditions that were
unimaginable then.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>
> The newly elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, said that he will
> seek to build new nuclear reactors, which will be completely different
> from those at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
unimaginable then.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
Jane Galt
Apr 26, 2013, 7:05:02 PM4/26/13
to
rda...@panix.com (Dick Adams) wrote :
Progressive Socialists are using alleged MMGW - "Man Made Global Warming"
as a huge redistribution of wealth scheme to collapse the west and give it
all to Socialists all over the world.
This is evidenced by the FACT that China is building a dirty coal plant
every WEEK and no one says squat about THAT.
"Man Made Global Warming" is a hoax intended to facilitate collapsing and
globalizing the United States into global socialism, and it's working!
as a huge redistribution of wealth scheme to collapse the west and give it
all to Socialists all over the world.
This is evidenced by the FACT that China is building a dirty coal plant
every WEEK and no one says squat about THAT.
"Man Made Global Warming" is a hoax intended to facilitate collapsing and
globalizing the United States into global socialism, and it's working!
Farm1
Apr 27, 2013, 2:06:01 AM4/27/13
to
"Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
> Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
and
http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Living-in-Fukushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
and
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-sticking-around-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
and
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
and
https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
> Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>>
>
> Who was harmed by it?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>>
>
> Who was harmed by it?
and
http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Living-in-Fukushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
and
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-sticking-around-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
and
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
and
https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
Wildbilly
Apr 27, 2013, 6:56:52 PM4/27/13
to
In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
--
Remember Rachel Corrie
<http://www.rachelcorrie.org/>
wrote:
--
Remember Rachel Corrie
<http://www.rachelcorrie.org/>
Jane Galt
May 2, 2013, 8:26:12 PM5/2/13
to
"Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes> wrote :
How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's technology.
They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such tsunami
conditions.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
Just get the environazis out of the way.
AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's technology.
They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such tsunami
conditions.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
Just get the environazis out of the way.
Jane Galt
May 2, 2013, 8:28:20 PM5/2/13
to
Wildbilly <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
> In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
> wrote:
>
>> "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>> news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>> > Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> >> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> >> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Who was harmed by it?
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> and
>> http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Living
>> -in-Fu kushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
>> and
>> http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-stic
>> king-a round-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
>> and
>> http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>> and
>> https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
Ah, the "No Nukes" movement from the 60's. How quaint.
Yet 21st century nuclear technology is completely safe, despite whiny
socialist propagandist enviro-nazis.
We have enough safe clean nuclear to cheaply power the whole world for 2
billion years.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
> In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
> wrote:
>
>> "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>> news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>> > Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> >> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> >> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Who was harmed by it?
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> and
>> http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Living
>> -in-Fu kushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
>> and
>> http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-stic
>> king-a round-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
>> and
>> http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>> and
>> https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
Yet 21st century nuclear technology is completely safe, despite whiny
socialist propagandist enviro-nazis.
We have enough safe clean nuclear to cheaply power the whole world for 2
billion years.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
David Hare-Scott
May 2, 2013, 9:39:07 PM5/2/13
to
Jane Galt wrote:
> How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
>
> AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's technology.
>
> They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such
> tsunami conditions.
>
> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>
> Just get the environazis out of the way.
So you are back to hurl more slogans and insults having rested and recovered
> How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
>
> AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's technology.
>
> They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such
> tsunami conditions.
>
> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>
> Just get the environazis out of the way.
for four months. Now you are on about nuclear power, having carefully
avoided defending your errors about climate change you shift the topic. No
surprise. But the content is actually much the same, accusing your
perceived opposition of bad faith and repeating chants you like the sound of
that you don't quite understand. No surprise. Either your courage or your
knowledge is insufficient to carry on a responsive conversation, which is
it?
David
Jane Galt
May 2, 2013, 11:44:50 PM5/2/13
to
"David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote :
So harsh on someone who doesn't have blind faith in your religions of "Man
Made Global Warming" and "No Nukes".
Made Global Warming" and "No Nukes".
David Hare-Scott
May 3, 2013, 1:07:05 AM5/3/13
to
Jane Galt wrote:
>>>
>>> Just get the environazis out of the way.
>>
>> So you are back to hurl more slogans and insults having rested and
>> recovered for four months. Now you are on about nuclear power,
>> having carefully avoided defending your errors about climate change
>> you shift the topic. No surprise. But the content is actually much
>> the same, accusing your perceived opposition of bad faith and
>> repeating chants you like the sound of that you don't quite
>> understand. No surprise. Either your courage or your knowledge is
>> insufficient to carry on a responsive conversation, which is it?
>>
>> David
>
> So harsh on someone who doesn't have blind faith in your religions of
> "Man Made Global Warming" and "No Nukes".
On the contrary I care little for faith. I care much for evidence and
>>>
>>> Just get the environazis out of the way.
>>
>> So you are back to hurl more slogans and insults having rested and
>> recovered for four months. Now you are on about nuclear power,
>> having carefully avoided defending your errors about climate change
>> you shift the topic. No surprise. But the content is actually much
>> the same, accusing your perceived opposition of bad faith and
>> repeating chants you like the sound of that you don't quite
>> understand. No surprise. Either your courage or your knowledge is
>> insufficient to carry on a responsive conversation, which is it?
>>
>> David
>
> So harsh on someone who doesn't have blind faith in your religions of
> "Man Made Global Warming" and "No Nukes".
reasoning, you should give it a try. Let me start you off, here is your
post:
<quote>
Has nothing to do with the fact that government FUNDED weather organizations
were lying with their data, we may actually be entering a period of global
cooling, and the climate has been changing for billions of years!
In fact there were periods in Europe when thet couldn't even grow crops and
were all starving, BEFORE modern carbon emissions!
<unquote>
were lying with their data, we may actually be entering a period of global
cooling, and the climate has been changing for billions of years!
In fact there were periods in Europe when thet couldn't even grow crops and
were all starving, BEFORE modern carbon emissions!
The next part is where you respond and present your evidence for these
claims that you say show climate change is a fraud. You need to establish
both the truth AND the relevance of these statements to your position:
1 - weather organisations were lying with their data
2 - we may be entering a period of global cooling
3 - climate has been changing for billions of years
4 - there were periods in Europe when they couldn't even grow crops and were
all starving, BEFORE modern carbon emissions
Take them one by one, show us your understanding. Or you could disappear
again.
David
Farm1
May 3, 2013, 8:46:12 AM5/3/13
to
"Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1B4BBE8D4795Ja...@216.196.121.131...
> Wildbilly <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
>
>> In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>>> news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>>> > Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>>> >> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>>> >> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Who was harmed by it?
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>>> and
>>> http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Living
>>> -in-Fu kushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
>>> and
>>> http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-stic
>>> king-a round-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
>>> and
>>> http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>>> and
>>> https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
>
> Ah, the "No Nukes" movement from the 60's. How quaint.
>
> Yet 21st century nuclear technology is completely safe, despite whiny
> socialist propagandist enviro-nazis.
If it's so safe then when are you offeing to store all those spent fuel rods
>
>> In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>>> news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>>> > Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>>> >> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>>> >> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Who was harmed by it?
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>>> and
>>> http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Living
>>> -in-Fu kushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
>>> and
>>> http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-stic
>>> king-a round-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
>>> and
>>> http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>>> and
>>> https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
>
> Ah, the "No Nukes" movement from the 60's. How quaint.
>
> Yet 21st century nuclear technology is completely safe, despite whiny
> socialist propagandist enviro-nazis.
in your bedroom?
>
> We have enough safe clean nuclear to cheaply power the whole world for 2
> billion years.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
That poorly written piece is truly amazing. Google shows that the author
> We have enough safe clean nuclear to cheaply power the whole world for 2
> billion years.
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
of that manifesto is a Tea Bagger. Now wonder it is so poorly written. But
it did give me a good laugh so thanks for posting the cite.
Farm1
May 3, 2013, 8:48:23 AM5/3/13
to
"David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:klv4hf$c5f$1...@news.albasani.net...
Farm1
May 3, 2013, 8:51:30 AM5/3/13
to
"Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1B4DD398B9F8Ja...@216.196.121.131...
Billy
May 4, 2013, 12:46:59 AM5/4/13
to
In article <XnsA1B4BBE8D4795Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
Blah, blah, blah. If nuclear energy was safe, the investors in nuclear
energy wouldn't require that government underwrite their insurance. Got
to put your money where your big, fat mouth is, sweety.
energy wouldn't require that government underwrite their insurance. Got
to put your money where your big, fat mouth is, sweety.
Billy
May 4, 2013, 12:53:12 AM5/4/13
to
In article <km0bc6$rv$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes>
Indeed! Good show Farm1. Nut jobs leading nut jobs. I presume the ghost
of Dixy Lee Ray will be along next.
of Dixy Lee Ray will be along next.
Billy
May 4, 2013, 12:55:58 AM5/4/13
to
In article <XnsA1B4BB8CC425CJa...@216.196.121.131>,
Hey, as stated above we can't stop industry if they want to build
reactors, but don't expect tax-payers to pay their insurance. Let them
leak a few curies of radiation, and we'll have their villas. Put your
money where your mouth is, sweety.
reactors, but don't expect tax-payers to pay their insurance. Let them
leak a few curies of radiation, and we'll have their villas. Put your
money where your mouth is, sweety.
Billy
May 4, 2013, 1:00:50 AM5/4/13
to
In article <XnsA1B4DD398B9F8Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
Wind, solar, and tidal energy doesn't pollute. You nuclear energy types
could vitrify the waste, or send it to the sun, but the real problem is
that then nuclear energy isn't competitive in the market place. But that
isn't our problem. You want it. You sell it. We will want to see the
numbers.
could vitrify the waste, or send it to the sun, but the real problem is
that then nuclear energy isn't competitive in the market place. But that
isn't our problem. You want it. You sell it. We will want to see the
numbers.
Billy
May 4, 2013, 1:44:30 AM5/4/13
to
In article <klvglb$68a$1...@news.albasani.net>,
You want a reasoned conversation from a "Bagger"? Are you mad, man?
Yes in deed, Global Forcing is at work , and we are supposed to be
heading into a new Ice Age.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#Orbital_forcing>
So why are we heating up, Jane, you sycophant of an adulterous false
prophet?
CO2 is what is wrong, and it started rising as soon as man put plow to
dirt, and has only accelerated with industrialization.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere>
<http://skepticalscience.net/pdf/rebuttal/mauna-loa-volcano-co2-measureme
nts-intermediate.pdf>
Yes in deed, Global Forcing is at work , and we are supposed to be
heading into a new Ice Age.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#Orbital_forcing>
So why are we heating up, Jane, you sycophant of an adulterous false
prophet?
CO2 is what is wrong, and it started rising as soon as man put plow to
dirt, and has only accelerated with industrialization.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere>
<http://skepticalscience.net/pdf/rebuttal/mauna-loa-volcano-co2-measureme
nts-intermediate.pdf>
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 1:47:32 PM5/5/13
to
"David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote :
NOTHING anyone could say would convince Progressive Socialists who have the
agenda of collapsing and globalizing the United States into global
socialism. AND the alleged "scientists" running the "Man Made Global
Warming" smoke & mirrors show, get their incomes from huge government
grants, and are in many cases employed by these Progressive Socialist
governments. So yes, it is a religion of blind faith state worship to
people like you, and nothing that anyone could say will convince you,
because you refuse to see.
Just wait for the Collapse you're causing and I hope you enjoy it before
you die from it.
agenda of collapsing and globalizing the United States into global
socialism. AND the alleged "scientists" running the "Man Made Global
Warming" smoke & mirrors show, get their incomes from huge government
grants, and are in many cases employed by these Progressive Socialist
governments. So yes, it is a religion of blind faith state worship to
people like you, and nothing that anyone could say will convince you,
because you refuse to see.
Just wait for the Collapse you're causing and I hope you enjoy it before
you die from it.
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 1:50:00 PM5/5/13
to
Billy <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
BULLSHIT!
With your false reasoning, man must be eliminated to "save the earth"!
Kill yourself and lower the CO2, won't you?
All that pseudo science completely ignores the FACT that plants take in CO2
and put out O2! Any indoor pot grower knows that they can speed up plant
growth by putting CO2 into the room.
With your false reasoning, man must be eliminated to "save the earth"!
Kill yourself and lower the CO2, won't you?
All that pseudo science completely ignores the FACT that plants take in CO2
and put out O2! Any indoor pot grower knows that they can speed up plant
growth by putting CO2 into the room.
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 1:52:09 PM5/5/13
to
"Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes> wrote :
What else would we call people who think that man must be eradicated, to
"save the earth" and that humans are a blight on the ecosystem instead of
being part of it? Who want to tax people to death and into ruin, to make a
0.1 degree temperature difference in 100 years, when the real agenda is
global socialism and to eliminate human civilization?
"save the earth" and that humans are a blight on the ecosystem instead of
being part of it? Who want to tax people to death and into ruin, to make a
0.1 degree temperature difference in 100 years, when the real agenda is
global socialism and to eliminate human civilization?
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 1:56:22 PM5/5/13
to
Billy <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
You're obviously not up on the latest safe clean nuclear technology, in
which waste isn't even a consideration anymore, with recycling. Check out a
Yahoo Group called Safe Clean Nuclear Energy, and quit talking about
Chernobyl aged technology, because they have it from a physics professor
that we have enough safe clean nuclear to power every home and vehicle on
earth for 2 billion years.
And as for being competitive in the marketplace, yes it would be, and with
private money, IF the e-nazis would be taken off the backs of the industry
and kept from regulating and suing it out of profitability!
But hey, much better to eliminate man than to solve problems, eh?
Just create a global Marxist society like North Korea and starve everyone
to death to "save the earth".
which waste isn't even a consideration anymore, with recycling. Check out a
Yahoo Group called Safe Clean Nuclear Energy, and quit talking about
Chernobyl aged technology, because they have it from a physics professor
that we have enough safe clean nuclear to power every home and vehicle on
earth for 2 billion years.
And as for being competitive in the marketplace, yes it would be, and with
private money, IF the e-nazis would be taken off the backs of the industry
and kept from regulating and suing it out of profitability!
But hey, much better to eliminate man than to solve problems, eh?
Just create a global Marxist society like North Korea and starve everyone
to death to "save the earth".
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 1:57:00 PM5/5/13
to
Anonymous
May 5, 2013, 1:58:00 PM5/5/13
to
"Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes> wrote :
You're a tea bagger, a real one, who sucks balls for a living!
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 2:00:09 PM5/5/13
to
Billy <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
> In article <XnsA1B4BBE8D4795Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
> Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
>
>> Wildbilly <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
>>
>> > In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1"
>> > <He...@there.sometimes> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>> >> > Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> >> >> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> >> >> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Who was harmed by it?
>> >>
>> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> >> and
lawsuits by environazis, nearly out of existence, yet it STILL generates
20% of U.S. electricity and 70% in France, which is a socialist nation. Why
would socialists have it generating 70%? Don't they want to "save the
earth"? Oh, why they must think it safe and clean.
> In article <XnsA1B4BBE8D4795Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
> Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
>
>> Wildbilly <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
>>
>> > In article <klfpmb$r4p$1...@dont-email.me>, "Farm1"
>> > <He...@there.sometimes> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>> >> > Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> >> >> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> >> >> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Who was harmed by it?
>> >>
>> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> >> and
>> >> http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Liv
>> >> ing -in-Fu kushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
>> >> and
>> >> http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-s
>> >> ing -in-Fu kushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8
>> >> and
>> >> http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-s
>> >> tic king-a round-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/
>> >> and
>> >> http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>> >> and
>> >> https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>> >
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
>>
>> Ah, the "No Nukes" movement from the 60's. How quaint.
>>
>> Yet 21st century nuclear technology is completely safe, despite whiny
>> socialist propagandist enviro-nazis.
>>
>> We have enough safe clean nuclear to cheaply power the whole world for
>> 2 billion years.
>>
>> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>
> Blah, blah, blah. If nuclear energy was safe, the investors in nuclear
> energy wouldn't require that government underwrite their insurance. Got
> to put your money where your big, fat mouth is, sweety.
>
Like I just said, the industry has been regulated and harassed with
>> >> and
>> >> http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>> >> and
>> >> https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>> >
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xabnoPsA9X4
>>
>> Ah, the "No Nukes" movement from the 60's. How quaint.
>>
>> Yet 21st century nuclear technology is completely safe, despite whiny
>> socialist propagandist enviro-nazis.
>>
>> We have enough safe clean nuclear to cheaply power the whole world for
>> 2 billion years.
>>
>> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>
> Blah, blah, blah. If nuclear energy was safe, the investors in nuclear
> energy wouldn't require that government underwrite their insurance. Got
> to put your money where your big, fat mouth is, sweety.
>
lawsuits by environazis, nearly out of existence, yet it STILL generates
20% of U.S. electricity and 70% in France, which is a socialist nation. Why
would socialists have it generating 70%? Don't they want to "save the
earth"? Oh, why they must think it safe and clean.
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 2:01:44 PM5/5/13
to
Billy <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
> In article <XnsA1B4BB8CC425CJa...@216.196.121.131>,
> Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
>
>> "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes> wrote :
>>
>> > "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>> > news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>> >> Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> >>> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> >>> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Who was harmed by it?
>> >
>> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> > and
profitable, IF the enviro-nazis could be taken off the backs of the
industry.
> In article <XnsA1B4BB8CC425CJa...@216.196.121.131>,
> Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
>
>> "Farm1" <He...@there.sometimes> wrote :
>>
>> > "Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
>> > news:XnsA1AEACA51F0F4Ja...@216.196.121.131...
>> >> Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote :
>> >>> When will it be safe for the farmers of Fukushima to resume their
>> >>> livelihood, and grow non-toxic crops again?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Who was harmed by it?
>> >
>> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20707753
>> > and
>> > http://nipponnews.photoshelter.com/gallery/Farmer-Naoto-Matsumura-Livi
>> > ng- in-Fukushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8 and
>> > http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-st
>> > ng- in-Fukushima-Nuclear-Zone/G0000m1Fx8LsFjt8 and
>> > http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/dog-survived-with-the-dried-meat-st
>> > ick ing-around-the-bone-of-dead-cattle-12km-area/ and
>> > http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>> > and
>> > https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
>>
>> AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's technology.
>>
>> They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such
>> tsunami conditions.
>>
>> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>>
>> Just get the environazis out of the way.
>
> Hey, as stated above we can't stop industry if they want to build
> reactors, but don't expect tax-payers to pay their insurance. Let them
> leak a few curies of radiation, and we'll have their villas. Put your
> money where your mouth is, sweety.
>
As I stated, modern technology is safe and clean, and COULD be privately
>> > http://www.occupyforanimals.org/fukushima--animals-left-behind.html
>> > and
>> > https://www.facebook.com/20kmlife
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
>>
>> AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's technology.
>>
>> They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such
>> tsunami conditions.
>>
>> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
>>
>> Just get the environazis out of the way.
>
> Hey, as stated above we can't stop industry if they want to build
> reactors, but don't expect tax-payers to pay their insurance. Let them
> leak a few curies of radiation, and we'll have their villas. Put your
> money where your mouth is, sweety.
>
profitable, IF the enviro-nazis could be taken off the backs of the
industry.
David Hare-Scott
May 5, 2013, 7:37:16 PM5/5/13
to
know nothing about me or my politics, not that it is relevant, other than I
have asked you to make your case. Yet once again you retreat tossing
nothing but bluster behind you.
AND the alleged "scientists" running the "Man Made
> Global Warming" smoke & mirrors show, get their incomes from huge
> government grants, and are in many cases employed by these
> Progressive Socialist governments. So yes, it is a religion of blind
> faith state worship to people like you, and nothing that anyone could
> say will convince you, because you refuse to see.
have had several opportunities to fix this and dodged and weaved every time.
You made four statements and cannot support one of them. When it's time to
step up and take your swing you are still hiding in the weeds calling out
school-yard insults.
Unless you are prepared to engage with the issue I have nothing more to say.
David
Farm1
May 5, 2013, 7:53:31 PM5/5/13
to
"Jane Galt" <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1B778BED9828Ja...@216.196.121.131...
David Hare-Scott
May 5, 2013, 8:16:28 PM5/5/13
to
And the White Knight is talking backwards....
D
Jane Galt
May 5, 2013, 9:18:16 PM5/5/13
to
climate-alarmists-debunk-their-science/
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/28/a-14-trillion-extortion-for-a-
global-warming-scam/
http://planet3.org/2013/04/01/overzealous-press-release-exposes-global-
warming-scam/
I could go on and on, of just Google: Global Warming scam
but suspect that you guys are just Marxists who like to heckle anyone who
disagrees with your state worshipping religion.
David Hare-Scott
May 5, 2013, 10:21:18 PM5/5/13
to
you to think, to engage, to support the specifics of your claims. Instead
here we go (as I predicted months ago) where you refuse to focus on anything
in particular but want me to play whackamole. I ain't playin'.
Take just one of your claims:
"climate has been changing for billions of years"
You could have answered this twenty times over with all the words you have
typed. Instead you can't do it. You don't understand a tenth of the
propaganda you spout or post links to. But don't let me interfere, the more
you dodge the more you prove how ignorant and mislead you are.
D
Billy
May 6, 2013, 2:08:29 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B77A5E51235Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
You don't seem to have very good reading comprehension, even for a sock
puppet character based on one of "novelist-philosopher", Ayn Rand's
fictional characters. Fiction is what Ayn Rand wrote. Her Objectivist
Movement lost all credibility when she dumped her married lover
Nathaniel Branden, when she discovered that he had taken another
mistress. Sounds a little subjective to me. But back to your reading
problem. There is no moratorium on building nuclear power plants.
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYftfoIZwnV>
Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is
expected that 4-6 new units may come on line by 2020, the first of those
resulting from 16 licence applications made since mid-2007 to build 24
new nuclear reactors.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price-Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity
_Act>
The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act (commonly called the
Price-Anderson Act) is a United States federal law, first passed in 1957
and since renewed several times, which governs liability-related issues
for all non-military nuclear facilities constructed in the United States
before 2026. The main purpose of the Act is to partially indemnify the
nuclear industry against liability claims arising from nuclear incidents
while still ensuring compensation coverage for the general public. The
Act establishes a no fault insurance-type system in which the first
approximately $12.6 billion (as of 2011) is industry-funded as described
in the Act. Any claims above the $12.6 billion would be covered by a
Congressional mandate to retroactively increase nuclear utility
liability or would be covered by the federal government.
<http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/index1.html>
The economic costs of Chernobyl? A variety of estimates from the 1990s
placed the costs over two decades at hundreds of billions of dollars.
These costs included direct damage, expenditures related to recovery and
mitigation, resettlement of people, social protection and health care
for the affected population, research on environment, health and the
production of clean food, radiation monitoring, as well as indirect
losses due to removing agricultural lands and forests from use and the
closing of agriculture and industrial facilities, and such additional
costs as cancellation of the nuclear power program in Belarus and the
additional costs of energy from the loss of power from Chernobyl.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disasters_by_cost>
Chernobyl disaster, 1986: $15 billion estimated cost of direct loss. It
is estimated that the damages could accumulate to �235 billion for
Ukraine and �201 billion for Belarus in the thirty years following the
accident.
2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, Japan: estimated more than $300
billion
------
So, we aren't talking about enviro-nazies (to use your crazed phrase).
We are talking about corporate entitlements, welfare queens, if you will.
You want the tax payers to pay for their own hanging rope.
There is no good reason to bring this up in a gardening group. Either
get your hands dirty, or hit the road.
puppet character based on one of "novelist-philosopher", Ayn Rand's
fictional characters. Fiction is what Ayn Rand wrote. Her Objectivist
Movement lost all credibility when she dumped her married lover
Nathaniel Branden, when she discovered that he had taken another
mistress. Sounds a little subjective to me. But back to your reading
problem. There is no moratorium on building nuclear power plants.
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYftfoIZwnV>
Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is
expected that 4-6 new units may come on line by 2020, the first of those
resulting from 16 licence applications made since mid-2007 to build 24
new nuclear reactors.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price-Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity
_Act>
The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act (commonly called the
Price-Anderson Act) is a United States federal law, first passed in 1957
and since renewed several times, which governs liability-related issues
for all non-military nuclear facilities constructed in the United States
before 2026. The main purpose of the Act is to partially indemnify the
nuclear industry against liability claims arising from nuclear incidents
while still ensuring compensation coverage for the general public. The
Act establishes a no fault insurance-type system in which the first
approximately $12.6 billion (as of 2011) is industry-funded as described
in the Act. Any claims above the $12.6 billion would be covered by a
Congressional mandate to retroactively increase nuclear utility
liability or would be covered by the federal government.
<http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/index1.html>
The economic costs of Chernobyl? A variety of estimates from the 1990s
placed the costs over two decades at hundreds of billions of dollars.
These costs included direct damage, expenditures related to recovery and
mitigation, resettlement of people, social protection and health care
for the affected population, research on environment, health and the
production of clean food, radiation monitoring, as well as indirect
losses due to removing agricultural lands and forests from use and the
closing of agriculture and industrial facilities, and such additional
costs as cancellation of the nuclear power program in Belarus and the
additional costs of energy from the loss of power from Chernobyl.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disasters_by_cost>
Chernobyl disaster, 1986: $15 billion estimated cost of direct loss. It
is estimated that the damages could accumulate to �235 billion for
Ukraine and �201 billion for Belarus in the thirty years following the
accident.
2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, Japan: estimated more than $300
billion
------
So, we aren't talking about enviro-nazies (to use your crazed phrase).
We are talking about corporate entitlements, welfare queens, if you will.
You want the tax payers to pay for their own hanging rope.
There is no good reason to bring this up in a gardening group. Either
get your hands dirty, or hit the road.
Billy
May 6, 2013, 2:29:45 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B77A19A949BJa...@216.196.121.131>,
I don't have time to toilet train you.
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYf2BIIZwnX>
The USA is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for
more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity.
The country's 104 nuclear reactors produced 821 billion kWh in 2011,
over 19% of total electrical output. There are now 103 units operable
and three under construction.
Your blather about enviro-nazis is just fiction, just like your loose
pants hero, Ayn Rand used to write (Nathaniel Branden).
The Feds, the "corporations big sugar daddy" will only pay for their
mistakes after they are in excess of $12.5 billion.
2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami (Fukushima), Japan: estimated more
than $300 billion
Chernobyl disaster, 1986: $15 billion estimated cost of direct loss. It
is estimated that the damages could accumulate to �235 billion for
Ukraine and �201 billion for Belarus in the thirty years following the
accident.
Like the man said, a hundred billion dollars here, and a hundred billion
dollars there, and soon your talking real money.
Now why don't you get back on that turnip cart that you obviously fell
off of, and go some where where people might be dumb enough to believe
your lies, some place like Elbonia.
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYf2BIIZwnX>
The USA is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for
more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity.
The country's 104 nuclear reactors produced 821 billion kWh in 2011,
over 19% of total electrical output. There are now 103 units operable
and three under construction.
Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is
expected that 4-6 new units may come on line by 2020, the first of those
resulting from 16 licence applications made since mid-2007 to build 24
new nuclear reactors.
So, where are the enviro-nazis? Nuclear power plants are alive and well.
expected that 4-6 new units may come on line by 2020, the first of those
resulting from 16 licence applications made since mid-2007 to build 24
new nuclear reactors.
Your blather about enviro-nazis is just fiction, just like your loose
pants hero, Ayn Rand used to write (Nathaniel Branden).
The Feds, the "corporations big sugar daddy" will only pay for their
mistakes after they are in excess of $12.5 billion.
2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami (Fukushima), Japan: estimated more
than $300 billion
Chernobyl disaster, 1986: $15 billion estimated cost of direct loss. It
is estimated that the damages could accumulate to �235 billion for
Ukraine and �201 billion for Belarus in the thirty years following the
accident.
dollars there, and soon your talking real money.
Now why don't you get back on that turnip cart that you obviously fell
off of, and go some where where people might be dumb enough to believe
your lies, some place like Elbonia.
Billy
May 6, 2013, 3:25:08 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B7797565030Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
Author and Founder of
"The Planetary Bill of Rights Project
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/tea-party-melissa-brookstone-oc
cupy-wall-street_n_1020710.html>
Melissa Brookstone, a member of one of the nation's largest Tea Party
groups, pushed the envelope on anti-Obama suggestions Wednesday, urging
small business owners to stop hiring new employees until the president
gives up his "globalist socialist agenda of redistribution of wealth."
Jeeze, you sure can pick 'em sweetie.
The Tea Party wants to return to the 12th Century society,
Jam God down your throat,
Leave critical thinking out of the schools' Curriculum,
have women know their place in the home,
abandon social welfare for corporate welfare,
and have every kid carry a gun to school.
> >> >>
> >> >> Just get the environazis out of the way.
> >> >
> >> > So you are back to hurl more slogans and insults having rested and
> >> > recovered for four months. Now you are on about nuclear power,
> >> > having carefully avoided defending your errors about climate change
> >> > you shift the topic. No surprise. But the content is actually much
> >> > the same, accusing your perceived opposition of bad faith and
> >> > repeating chants you like the sound of that you don't quite
> >> > understand. No surprise. Either your courage or your knowledge is
> >> > insufficient to carry on a responsive conversation, which is it?
> >> >
> >> > David
> >>
> >> So harsh on someone who doesn't have blind faith in your religions of
> >> "Man Made Global Warming" and "No Nukes".
> >
> > Wind, solar, and tidal energy doesn't pollute. You nuclear energy types
> > could vitrify the waste, or send it to the sun, but the real problem is
> > that then nuclear energy isn't competitive in the market place. But that
> > isn't our problem. You want it. You sell it. We will want to see the
> > numbers.
> >
>
> You're obviously not up on the latest safe clean nuclear technology, in
> which waste isn't even a consideration anymore, with recycling. Check out a
> Yahoo Group called Safe Clean Nuclear Energy, and quit talking about
> Chernobyl aged technology, because they have it from a physics professor
> that we have enough safe clean nuclear to power every home and vehicle on
> earth for 2 billion years.
The above is old crap, and has been dealt with in 2 previous posts.
Can't you come up with any new lies?
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYf7G4IZwnX>
>
> And as for being competitive in the marketplace, yes it would be, and with
> private money, IF the e-nazis would be taken off the backs of the industry
> and kept from regulating and suing it out of profitability!
Why didn't you say you were a Gov. Rick Perry (no regulations)
supporter. Yes sir, that boy has Texas booming (and after not wanting to
give the East Coast disaster money for Sandy, he was beggin' Washington
for money to cover his fertilizer disaster).
Now if you will turn to page 60, of the April 2013 Scientific American,
you will see that Energy Return/Investment is
16 for conventional oil
9 for ethanol from sugar cane
---
40 for hydroelectric
20 for wind
18 for coal
7 for natural gas
6 for solar
and
5 for nuclear
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/27/imf-want-to-f
ight-climate-change-get-rid-of-1-9-trillion-in-energy-subsidies/>
IMF: Want to fight climate change? Get rid of $1.9 trillion in energy
subsidies.
Whats the simplest way to tackle global warming? Make sure that fossil
fuels are priced properly and not subsidized.
Thats the core idea behind a large new report (pdf) from the
International Monetary Fund, which argues that the world misprices
fossil fuels to the tune of some $1.9 trillion per year.
>
> But hey, much better to eliminate man than to solve problems, eh?
> Just create a global Marxist society like North Korea and starve everyone
> to death to "save the earth".
Nuclear is expensive, it's dirty, and it's welfare, as shown above in
the 2 preceding posts. Have you no shame to be rattling on like a
shister, after all your claims have been refuted?
Somehow, I think you'll be back repeating your unsubstantiated lies.
Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
> Billy <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
>
> > In article <XnsA1B4DD398B9F8Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
> > Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote :
> >>
> >> > Jane Galt wrote:
> >> >> How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
> >> >>
> >> >> AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's
> >> >> technology.
> >> >>
> >> >> They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such
> >> >> tsunami conditions.
> >> >>
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
- Melissa Brookstone
> Billy <wild...@withouta.net> wrote :
>
> > In article <XnsA1B4DD398B9F8Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
> > Jane Galt <Plain...@WhoIsJaneGalt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote :
> >>
> >> > Jane Galt wrote:
> >> >> How many people were killed by Fukishima, NOT the tsunami?
> >> >>
> >> >> AND Fukishima was 1970's technology, Chernobyl was 1950's
> >> >> technology.
> >> >>
> >> >> They now have safe clean nuclear that would even be safe in such
> >> >> tsunami conditions.
> >> >>
http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/WeHaveAbundantEnergyForAllTime.html
Author and Founder of
"The Planetary Bill of Rights Project
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/tea-party-melissa-brookstone-oc
cupy-wall-street_n_1020710.html>
Melissa Brookstone, a member of one of the nation's largest Tea Party
groups, pushed the envelope on anti-Obama suggestions Wednesday, urging
small business owners to stop hiring new employees until the president
gives up his "globalist socialist agenda of redistribution of wealth."
Jeeze, you sure can pick 'em sweetie.
The Tea Party wants to return to the 12th Century society,
Jam God down your throat,
Leave critical thinking out of the schools' Curriculum,
have women know their place in the home,
abandon social welfare for corporate welfare,
and have every kid carry a gun to school.
> >> >>
> >> >> Just get the environazis out of the way.
> >> >
> >> > So you are back to hurl more slogans and insults having rested and
> >> > recovered for four months. Now you are on about nuclear power,
> >> > having carefully avoided defending your errors about climate change
> >> > you shift the topic. No surprise. But the content is actually much
> >> > the same, accusing your perceived opposition of bad faith and
> >> > repeating chants you like the sound of that you don't quite
> >> > understand. No surprise. Either your courage or your knowledge is
> >> > insufficient to carry on a responsive conversation, which is it?
> >> >
> >> > David
> >>
> >> So harsh on someone who doesn't have blind faith in your religions of
> >> "Man Made Global Warming" and "No Nukes".
> >
> > Wind, solar, and tidal energy doesn't pollute. You nuclear energy types
> > could vitrify the waste, or send it to the sun, but the real problem is
> > that then nuclear energy isn't competitive in the market place. But that
> > isn't our problem. You want it. You sell it. We will want to see the
> > numbers.
> >
>
> You're obviously not up on the latest safe clean nuclear technology, in
> which waste isn't even a consideration anymore, with recycling. Check out a
> Yahoo Group called Safe Clean Nuclear Energy, and quit talking about
> Chernobyl aged technology, because they have it from a physics professor
> that we have enough safe clean nuclear to power every home and vehicle on
> earth for 2 billion years.
Can't you come up with any new lies?
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYf7G4IZwnX>
>
> And as for being competitive in the marketplace, yes it would be, and with
> private money, IF the e-nazis would be taken off the backs of the industry
> and kept from regulating and suing it out of profitability!
supporter. Yes sir, that boy has Texas booming (and after not wanting to
give the East Coast disaster money for Sandy, he was beggin' Washington
for money to cover his fertilizer disaster).
Now if you will turn to page 60, of the April 2013 Scientific American,
you will see that Energy Return/Investment is
16 for conventional oil
9 for ethanol from sugar cane
---
40 for hydroelectric
20 for wind
18 for coal
7 for natural gas
6 for solar
and
5 for nuclear
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/27/imf-want-to-f
ight-climate-change-get-rid-of-1-9-trillion-in-energy-subsidies/>
IMF: Want to fight climate change? Get rid of $1.9 trillion in energy
subsidies.
Whats the simplest way to tackle global warming? Make sure that fossil
fuels are priced properly and not subsidized.
Thats the core idea behind a large new report (pdf) from the
International Monetary Fund, which argues that the world misprices
fossil fuels to the tune of some $1.9 trillion per year.
>
> But hey, much better to eliminate man than to solve problems, eh?
> Just create a global Marxist society like North Korea and starve everyone
> to death to "save the earth".
the 2 preceding posts. Have you no shame to be rattling on like a
shister, after all your claims have been refuted?
Somehow, I think you'll be back repeating your unsubstantiated lies.
Billy
May 6, 2013, 3:27:17 PM5/6/13
to
Billy
May 6, 2013, 3:30:33 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B779913E993Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
Here ya go. Now it shows its colors.
C-A-N Y-O-U R-E-A-D ?
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nuc
lear-Power/#.UYf7G4IZwnX
Nothing is stopping them, honey,
except they want" MO MONEY".
C-A-N Y-O-U R-E-A-D ?
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nuc
lear-Power/#.UYf7G4IZwnX
Nothing is stopping them, honey,
except they want" MO MONEY".
Billy
May 6, 2013, 3:33:15 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B778BED9828Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
Do you have a reputable, sane, authority who says that, or are you just
going to rattle on with your "BIG LIE"??
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYf7G4IZwnX>
going to rattle on with your "BIG LIE"??
<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nu
clear-Power/#.UYf7G4IZwnX>
Billy
May 6, 2013, 3:53:01 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B77861A6C57Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
Great! Our savior is stoned. Oh, happy day.
You do realize that it was acolytes of the loose pants Ayn Rand, who
crashed the economy of the Western World. Developing countries are doing
fine, thank you very much.
CO2 is part of a cycle. It goes round and round. Left to its own
devices, nature sequesters CO2 which becomes coal, oil, and limestone.
What people have done is to reintroduce carbon that had been naturally
sequestered in the soil, back into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide traps
heat raising the temperature, which increases evaporation of water which
increases the temperature, which thaws the frozen tundra releasing
methane which traps heat and raises the temperature, which melt the
light reflecting snow, exposing dark rock and soil which heats the
atmosphere. The more water vapor there is in the atmosphere, the more
energy it can release as it changes back to a liquid (let's call it
rain, OK?). This energy drives storms making them more powerful. The
oceans heat changing air flows over them, and the weather changes the
world over. Got it?
What sane people suggest is that we stop introducing the sequestered
carbon back into the atmosphere, and sequester much the CO2 that is
there. This can be done as easily as making charcoal.
We await your next Randian, environazis, "Bagger" dilerium. It is kinda
getting boring. Maybe you could do some summersaults, and high kicks to
liven it up.
You do realize that it was acolytes of the loose pants Ayn Rand, who
crashed the economy of the Western World. Developing countries are doing
fine, thank you very much.
CO2 is part of a cycle. It goes round and round. Left to its own
devices, nature sequesters CO2 which becomes coal, oil, and limestone.
What people have done is to reintroduce carbon that had been naturally
sequestered in the soil, back into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide traps
heat raising the temperature, which increases evaporation of water which
increases the temperature, which thaws the frozen tundra releasing
methane which traps heat and raises the temperature, which melt the
light reflecting snow, exposing dark rock and soil which heats the
atmosphere. The more water vapor there is in the atmosphere, the more
energy it can release as it changes back to a liquid (let's call it
rain, OK?). This energy drives storms making them more powerful. The
oceans heat changing air flows over them, and the weather changes the
world over. Got it?
What sane people suggest is that we stop introducing the sequestered
carbon back into the atmosphere, and sequester much the CO2 that is
there. This can be done as easily as making charcoal.
We await your next Randian, environazis, "Bagger" dilerium. It is kinda
getting boring. Maybe you could do some summersaults, and high kicks to
liven it up.
Billy
May 6, 2013, 3:54:48 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B777F64BF7BJa...@216.196.121.131>,
Huh? I thought we were talking about nuclear reactors in the gardens.
Where did the political hit come from?
Where did the political hit come from?
Billy
May 6, 2013, 4:28:59 PM5/6/13
to
In article <XnsA1B7C462331F1Ja...@216.196.121.131>,
The Capitalist's Tool? Larry Bell, the author is hawking his book on a
"Climate Hoax", and he is an architect not an atmospheric scientist. Do
you have some one who isn't so partisan?
>
> http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php
Good to have all the nuts in one place. Some disagree because they don't
like the models, or the inputs, but that isn't to say that they don't
disagree on the conclusions.
>
> http://www.globalclimatescam.com/
Not much science here, just Bagger feel good stories.
Temp keep setting records, no new lows. More CO2 in the atmosphere.
Corral reefs dying from lowered pH of the oceans. "100 year" storms
happening more often.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial>
Climate change denial has been associated with the energy lobby,
industry advocates and free market think tanks, often in the United
States.[4][5][6][7][8]
"Climate Hoax", and he is an architect not an atmospheric scientist. Do
you have some one who isn't so partisan?
>
> http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php
Good to have all the nuts in one place. Some disagree because they don't
like the models, or the inputs, but that isn't to say that they don't
disagree on the conclusions.
>
> http://www.globalclimatescam.com/
Not much science here, just Bagger feel good stories.
Temp keep setting records, no new lows. More CO2 in the atmosphere.
Corral reefs dying from lowered pH of the oceans. "100 year" storms
happening more often.
>
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/28/a-14-trillion-extortion-for-a-
> global-warming-scam/
>
> http://planet3.org/2013/04/01/overzealous-press-release-exposes-global-
> warming-scam/
Sartre Batr, another "Bagger" partisan with no apparent expertise
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/28/a-14-trillion-extortion-for-a-
> global-warming-scam/
>
> http://planet3.org/2013/04/01/overzealous-press-release-exposes-global-
> warming-scam/
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial>
Climate change denial has been associated with the energy lobby,
industry advocates and free market think tanks, often in the United
States.[4][5][6][7][8]
>
> I could go on and on, of just Google: Global Warming scam
>
> but suspect that you guys are just Marxists who like to heckle anyone who
> disagrees with your state worshipping religion.
Say high to the bottom of my Kill File, Sweety.
> I could go on and on, of just Google: Global Warming scam
>
> but suspect that you guys are just Marxists who like to heckle anyone who
> disagrees with your state worshipping religion.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages