Al Gore: Scientists Predicted Global Warming Would Cause These Snow Storms. Huh? No They Didn't!
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
Consider this from another global warming bible, The Independent,
(March 20, 2000), when the IPCC was gearing up to get us all to take
global warming seriously:
"
... the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which
are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David
Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU)
of the University of East Anglia [the epicentre of global warming
research], within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare
and exciting event". Children just aren't going to know what snow is."
mr dude
CalC
It's easy dude..... just predict a little of everything and it either
didn't happen yet or you're right when it does. This guy is like a
tarot card reader and the simple minded buy that too,.
cloud dreamer
> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>
>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
financial stake in all of this???
>>
>> Consider this from another global warming bible, The Independent,
>> (March 20, 2000), when the IPCC was gearing up to get us all to take
>> global warming seriously:
>> "
>>
>> ... the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which
>> are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David
>> Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU)
>> of the University of East Anglia [the epicentre of global warming
>> research], within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare
>> and exciting event". Children just aren't going to know what snow is."
>>
>> mr dude
>
> It's easy dude..... just predict a little of everything and it either
> didn't happen yet or you're right when it does. This guy is like a
> tarot card reader and the simple minded buy that too,.
The quote is out of context. Viner was talking about Britain, not the
globe as a whole.
No scientist has said it will stop snowing globally. In fact, anyone who
points to snow and cries foul is just plain stupid. The global temps are
up 1 degree in a century. How do they expect a winter average of -23 in
a place like Winnipeg to suddenly jump to positive numbers? The average
global temperature would have to rise by dozens of degrees for it to
stop snowing in Winnipeg. And if it ever got that warm, it would be too
hot for humans to exist.
What we are seeing is in line with what is being predicted. A warmer
atmosphere and warming ocean will produce more moisture. In summer, it
means more rain (especially in mid-latitudes). In winter, it means more
snow. This year, a strong La Nina event in the Pacific is permitting
Arctic air to descend farther north. La Nina is like someone that stands
at the fridge and holds the door open. The fridge (Arctic) warms while
everywhere south of it freezes.
So, get your head out of the sand with the asinine "oh it's snowing,
it's a hoax" bullshit. It's only proves how out of touch with reality
the deniers are.
And stop relying on Gore for your punching bag. If you're all so sure
you know more than the scientists themselves, challenge them. They are
open to challenge at realclimate.org - go there, tell them you've
figured out the whole problem and DISPUTE THEM.
Though, I'm not holding my breath.
Cowards.
..
--
We must change the way we live
Or the climate will do it for us
Sarah Ehrett
wrote:
>On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>>
>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>
>Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
>the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
>financial stake in all of this???
[ Ignoring the fact this crap is OT for asfpn-p]
Do people honestly think we can run the US on windmills and solar panels?
Get the nutter "NO NUKES" bunch off peoples arses so we can build nuclear
power plants. As it is with Obammy's anti-coal policies we'll be having
rolling black/brown outs. How about we drill for our own oil in Anwar or
in the Gulf and do it now.
BTW, do any of the anti - fossil fuelers know what happens when you have no
new power plants being built plus high energy costs as promised by Obammy
and you get hundreds of thousands of workers arriving home, plugging in
their electric cars, firing up the stoves and ovens for dinner, surfing the
net and watching the big screen TV's ...?
Be sure to vote " Obama in 2012 " .
Ray O'Hara
"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:2oslk6lgr5jld2i8d...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 11:10:07 -0330, cloud dreamer <Sa...@Resources.now>
> wrote:
>
>>On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
>>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
>>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>>>
>>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>>
>>Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
>>the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
>>financial stake in all of this???
>
> [ Ignoring the fact this crap is OT for asfpn-p]
>
> Do people honestly think we can run the US on windmills and solar panels?
>
actually yes we can
the wind and the sun are free don't pollute and can generate unlimited
power.
T. Boone Pickens is an advocate we do just that. he seems to think with
those sources and natural gas we can wean off oil reletively easily and
quickly.
Sarah Ehrett
wrote:
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:2oslk6lgr5jld2i8d...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 11:10:07 -0330, cloud dreamer <Sa...@Resources.now>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
>>>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
>>>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>>>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>>>>
>>>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>>>
>>>Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
>>>the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
>>>financial stake in all of this???
>>
>> [ Ignoring the fact this crap is OT for asfpn-p]
>>
>> Do people honestly think we can run the US on windmills and solar panels?
>>
>
>actually yes we can
Get back to me when we get an average sized size city operating entirely on
wind and solar power.
cloud dreamer
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:48:53 -0500, "Ray O'Hara"<raymon...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Sarah Ehrett"<nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:2oslk6lgr5jld2i8d...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 11:10:07 -0330, cloud dreamer<Sa...@Resources.now>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
>>>>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
>>>>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>>>>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>>>>
>>>> Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
>>>> the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
>>>> financial stake in all of this???
>>>
>>> [ Ignoring the fact this crap is OT for asfpn-p]
>>>
>>> Do people honestly think we can run the US on windmills and solar panels?
>>>
>>
>> actually yes we can
>
> Get back to me when we get an average sized size city operating entirely on
> wind and solar power.
>
And hydro and nuclear and thermal and clean coal (captured carbon).
My city gets 85% of its power from clean hydro. Within the next 3 to 6
years, it will get the other 15% from clean hydro and wind.
And some of that hydro (Lower Churchill, Labrador) will feed power grids
in the northeastern US.
So, there you go. Not only possible, but practical and happening today.
So, what do you advocate. Nothing? Do you honestly think we can afford
to do nothing? The US only has enough recoverable fossil fuels to do
them a few years. And what happens when the planet's limited supply of
oil begins to run out.
Not run out.
BEGINS to run out.
If you think the planet can make a transition suddenly to alternate
energies, you're insane. The result will be wars.
And that's climate change aside. We have to make the change now solely
due to peak oil.
Husky
Hey Lady,
WTF do you mean by Cowards?
How does it feel being at the bottom of a Pyramid scheme? There are
thousands of reputable scientist who refute the mumbo jumbo you're
spouting. Gee, are we using the same equipment and exact same
locations to record temp. readings as we did a century ago? Let's
micro manage for shits and giggles: How are the numbers been for the
past 15 years?
If there's a hot summer, you say it's because of man made global
"Climate Change." If there is an unusually cold winter, you people
parrot "you don't know the difference between weather and climate."
Go polish Bill Maher's knob.
Sarah Ehrett
wrote:
>On 03/02/2011 3:49 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:48:53 -0500, "Ray O'Hara"<raymon...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Sarah Ehrett"<nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>> news:2oslk6lgr5jld2i8d...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 11:10:07 -0330, cloud dreamer<Sa...@Resources.now>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
>>>>>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
>>>>>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>>>>>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>>>>>
>>>>> Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
>>>>> the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
>>>>> financial stake in all of this???
>>>>
>>>> [ Ignoring the fact this crap is OT for asfpn-p]
>>>>
>>>> Do people honestly think we can run the US on windmills and solar panels?
>>>>
>>>
>>> actually yes we can
>>
>> Get back to me when we get an average sized size city operating entirely on
>> wind and solar power.
>>
>
>
>And hydro and nuclear and thermal and clean coal (captured carbon).
No. Ray said wind and solar and currently it is not possible to run even a
small city using only wind and solar power.
>My city gets 85% of its power from clean hydro. Within the next 3 to 6
>years, it will get the other 15% from clean hydro and wind.
>
>And some of that hydro (Lower Churchill, Labrador) will feed power grids
>in the northeastern US.
>
>So, there you go. Not only possible, but practical and happening today.
In Washington DC? Atlanta Georgia? Philadelphia? Chicago? Houston
Texas? LA?
Not happening.
I live less than 20 miles from two clean coal power plants and about 40
miles from a nuclear plant. The nuke nutters has the nuclear plant all
but shut down 24/7 and Obammer wants to destroy the coal industry.
A Google listing of articles showing the EPA's denial of coal mining
permits. http://tinyurl.com/5uz6r3f
>So, what do you advocate. Nothing?
Nuclear power, natural gas, coal, and oil.
The US and other industrialized nations consume a lot of oil and will
continue to do so long after I'm toes up.
cloud dreamer
Sorry. Not enough gas, coal and oil to sustain the planet indefinitely.
You're fooling yourself if you think differently.
And calling Obama names only proves you don't have an argument, only an
agenda. Lots of rhetoric. No facts.
Not wasting any more of my time.
<plonk>
Sarah Ehrett
wrote:
And yet you have not one cite to prove your position.
>You're fooling yourself if you think differently.
Nice attempt at moving goalposts and putting words in my mouth.
>And calling Obama names only proves you don't have an argument, only an
>agenda. Lots of rhetoric. No facts.
I seem to have missed all your cited facts.
>Not wasting any more of my time.
>
><plonk>
>
> ..
Poor dear. You have a history of running from the truth.
zz...@zz.com
>Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>
>This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>
>Consider this from another global warming bible, The Independent,
>(March 20, 2000), when the IPCC was gearing up to get us all to take
>global warming seriously:
>"
It's not global warming, it should really be called Global Climate
Change. That means here in Boston instead of a normal winter
with 34" of snow get ready for winters with more than 100" of snow..
(we've received close to 60" and today is only 2/3/11.
>
> ... the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which
>are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David
>Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU)
>of the University of East Anglia [the epicentre of global warming
>research], within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare
>and exciting event". Children just aren't going to know what snow is."
Wrong. Look for winters giving Boston 100+ inches of snow.
>
>mr dude
cloud dreamer
Seriously??? You think there is??? Then you are not only fooling
yourself. You are a fool.
>
>> You're fooling yourself if you think differently.
>
> Nice attempt at moving goalposts and putting words in my mouth.
Deflection from the truth. You're fooling yourself if you think this
planet can afford to burn fossil fuels until they're gone. It's obvious
that you don't understand the most basic facts of climate change.
>
>> And calling Obama names only proves you don't have an argument, only an
>> agenda. Lots of rhetoric. No facts.
>
> I seem to have missed all your cited facts.
Go debate the scientists themselves at realclimate.org
>
>> Not wasting any more of my time.
>>
>> <plonk>
>>
>> ..
>
> Poor dear. You have a history of running from the truth.
You haven't provided any. All I see is rhetoric basic in stiff
ideological thinking instead of open minded curiosity.
I plonked you before. Now I remember why.
<plonked on my other computer>
..
cloud dreamer
The man quoted was referring to England, not the United States.
But deniers don't want to put their cherry picked quotes into context.
..
Sarah Ehrett
<Sa...@Resources.now> wrote:
< Nothing of value, as usual....>
[ Flush unread histrionic babble from our resident plonker *. ]
* 1. plonker - dope, idiot, moron, wally, pillock, dunderhead, dimwit.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=plonker
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
> The quote is out of context. Viner was talking about Britain, not the
> globe as a whole.
Let me see....the topic is GLOBAL warming and now you are saying he
was only talking about England???
Here comes an "inconvenient truth" for you, England had the heaviest
snowfalls in 18 years!!! It is sorry easy to refute you people yet you
will hang on to your religion of global warming now matter how many
facts get in your way!!!
Britain is bracing itself for further disruption as fresh bands of
snow sweep across parts of the country.
South-east England has been hit by the heaviest snow in 18 years,
causing trains and buses to be cancelled, and airports and schools to
be closed.
Snow is now moving north, with the Pennines, north-east England and
the Scottish Borders at risk of seeing up to 12 inches (30cm) of
snowfall.
The Met Office has issued an extreme weather warning for much of the
UK.
As well as heavy snow in many areas, there is a risk of widespread ice
in London and south-east England as temperatures fall as low as -7C
overnight.
mr dude
CalC
> "Sarah Ehrett" <ninety...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:2oslk6lgr5jld2i8d...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 11:10:07 -0330, cloud dreamer <S...@Resources.now>
> > wrote:
>
> >>On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
> >>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
> >>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
> >>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>
> >>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>
> >>Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
> >>the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
> >>financial stake in all of this???
>
> > [ Ignoring the fact this crap is OT for asfpn-p]
>
> > Do people honestly think we can run the US on windmills and solar panels?
>
> actually yes we can
> the wind and the sun are free don't pollute and can generate unlimited
> power.
> T. Boone Pickens is an advocate we do just that. he seems to think with
> those sources and natural gas we can wean off oil reletively easily and
> quickly.
Natural Gas is still a fossil fuel and is not pollution free jackass.
You can use wind and solar for SOME of the needs but never all. Either
suck it up and build nuke plants or love that oil... You should be all
for it O'Hara the French get 75% of their electricity from them and
everything European is better right?
CalC
Here's a simple truth that isn't disputable...... if all global
warming/ climate change or any other data is truly irrefutable why lie
and manipulate it as they were caught doing in their own emails? Why
not let it stand on it's own. Point is I dont know for sure and
neither do you CloudDreamer.... it's all speculation and more data is
needed but when one side is caught gerrymandering data their whole
argument has to become suspect. Going to other sources of energy is
smart for a lot of reasons.... pollution and price two of them but
like anything the question is AT WHAT COST..... Don't tell me you need
to triple my electric bill via cap and trade to save me from the
boogeyman because you aren't going to win anyone over with that
nonsense.
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
> The man quoted was referring to England, not the United States.
>
> But deniers don't want to put their cherry picked quotes into context.
cloud dreamer
Right there, you're wrong. There were multiple independent reviews of
the emails and none found any manipulation of data. Of course, you don't
see that because Fox and friends played up the emails but let it quietly
die when report after report came back with the same conclusion. That
includes a panel of journalists who would jump at the chance to prove
that the emails were really doing what the deniers wanted you to
believe...but they concluded that there was no manipulation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/07/climategate-review-clears-scientists-dishonesty
http://e360.yale.edu/content/digest.msp?id=2491
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2745259
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34392959/ns/us_news-environment/
> not let it stand on it's own. Point is I dont know for sure and
> neither do you CloudDreamer.... it's all speculation and more data is
> needed but when one side is caught gerrymandering data their whole
> argument has to become suspect.
They were not caught doing anything. It was an engineered sideshow for
Copenhagen. It was a single email out of thousands that used scientific
terms that were twisted to mean something else for the laymen and the
controversy disappeared as soon as Copenhagen finished. Funny, that.
Yeah. Cause by then, the universities and journalists were investigating
the emails.
No more data is needed. The scientists are in consensus. We are warming
the planet. The debate in the scientific community has moved to
predicting how precisely this will affect the planet. (But the deniers
would have you believe that disputes there mean it's a dispute over the
existence of AGW - it's not...only a dispute over how increasing the
planet's temp by 0.2 degrees a decade will impact us).
Going to other sources of energy is
> smart for a lot of reasons.... pollution and price two of them but
> like anything the question is AT WHAT COST..... Don't tell me you need
> to triple my electric bill via cap and trade to save me from the
> boogeyman because you aren't going to win anyone over with that
> nonsense.
I'm not telling you anything. What is done about it is for the
politicians to decide. Disagreeing with cap and trade or whatever
doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.
But if you truly understood the problem, you wouldn't blink twice at the
prospect of paying more for power because you'd understand just how
important clean energy is. Even more important if you have kids. I'm
assuming you actually like your kids, of course. That you'd want them to
live in a safe and secure world.
Maybe not.
Oh, and clean energy isn't always going to cost you more. My rates are
among the cheapest around and 85% of my power is clean. I've also
reduced my power bill by 30% by making some simple changes like
installing programmable thermostats and insulating more.
It's only nonsense to those not willing to educate themselves.
..
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
>
> Here's a simple truth that isn't disputable...... if all global
> warming/ climate change or any other data is truly irrefutable why lie
> and manipulate it as they were caught doing in their own emails?
It is because it is NOT about climate change but rather hatred of
Capitalism and control of an individuals choice.
The climate has always changed!
Hell we had several Ice Ages!! Surely according to the "climate
change" cult, they most certainly have been "man made" because the
climate is and always has been static according to these Heaven's Gate
the UFOs are coming Marshall Applewhite worshippers.
I find it hilarious that the same group of loons told us that in the
1970s the world would run out of oil (not to mention the Population
Bomb, killer bees, Y2K planes falling from the sky, the coming Ice Age
in 1970, Alar on apples would murder our kids, the Loch Ness monster
is real, Bigfoot is real, etc. etc.).
It really shouldn't matter to these mental patients because we all
know that the Incan calendar says that the world ends in 2012!!!
mr dude
CalC
The sources are not independent and there is not a consensus. You want
a consensus to shut down any debate...
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
>
> Right there, you're wrong. There were multiple independent reviews of
> the emails and none found any manipulation of data.
Your own "God" has admitted that there has been ZERO climate change in
the last 15 years!!
Why do you hate your God???????
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was
warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not
be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no
‘statistically significant’ warming.
mr dude
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
>
> It's only nonsense to those not willing to educate themselves.
>
> ..
Please educate me on why the Ice Ages were not man made but yet this
current "crisis" is man made.
Please tell me why the "greenhouse" effect is contrary to the "ozone
hole".
Please tell me me that global warming is occurring on Mars and Venus
but Earth global warming is different.
That pesky "Sun"thingy just drives you barking moonbats crazy doesn't
it???
mr dude (the Libtards don't understand the "Sun" because they worship
the moon and fat ass Michael Moore)
euphy
> On 03/02/2011 10:43 AM, CalC wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 7:30 pm, "mr d...@harvarduniversity.edu"
>> <foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Gore is going to take credit for every weather event and try to tie it
>>> to "global warming" so he can keep making his millions!
>>>
>>> This is WORSE than Bernie Madoff! Why isn't Gore in prison???
>
> Why isn't every oil executive in prison??? They're making TRILLIONS off
> the continued use of fossil fuels. You honestly think they don't have a
> financial stake in all of this???
Why aren't you in prison? Are you the only motherfucker in the world
leaving a zero-carbon footprint? You hypocritical POS. Turn off your
heat and drop your car keys down the nearest sewer.
cloud dreamer
See. Another in need of an education. Maybe if you learned a little
about climate change, you'd learn that we don't have to return to the
caves to reduce the carbon emissions.
Oh, and my vehicle is a SULEV. Emits 95% less than a regular vehicle.
<plonk>
cloud dreamer
You still think there's a debate because FOX and the oil industry wants
you to believe there is. Go ask any climate scientist (a real one, not
one hired by the oil industry or one pretending to be a climate
scientist). Go ahead. This site is put together by climate scientists
and is OPEN TO DEBATE. Go ahead. Debate them:
Or here:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Where you can pick any of the deniers arguments and see them debunked.
They even offer a Basic or Intermediate explanation. I suggest you pick
Basic. It's aimed at people like you who have little to no science
background.
Oh, and here's your consensus argument:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm
Make sure you read the last paragraph:
"We should also consider official scientific bodies and what they think
about climate change. There are no national or major scientific
institutions anywhere in the world that dispute the theory of
anthropogenic climate change. Not one."
Don't agree with it? Don't tell me. Tell them. There's a comment section
below each that gives people the opportunity to challenge each point.
So, go ahead. You think you're smarter than them, tell THEM there is a
debate. Present YOUR evidence.
Of all the people I've given this opportunity to, not one has accepted.
Why? Because you don't know what you're talking about. Because when
rhetoric meets facts, the facts win.
Not wanting to see them doesn't mean they're not real.
zz...@zz.com
>
>No. Ray said wind and solar and currently it is not possible to run even a
>small city using only wind and solar power.
But if we gear up produce the technology there will be the ability to
do it.
>In Washington DC? Atlanta Georgia? Philadelphia? Chicago? Houston
>Texas? LA?
>
>Not happening.
Too bad we can't harness all the hot air coming from the repulblicans.
There would be enough to power the entire plant 10 times over.
>
>I live less than 20 miles from two clean coal power plants and about 40
>miles from a nuclear plant. The nuke nutters has the nuclear plant all
>but shut down 24/7 and Obammer wants to destroy the coal industry.
In this post 9/11 era it's time to shut down all nuclear power.
I keep hearing how xxxxx nuclear power plant can withstand a
crash of a 747. Personally i'm not willing to test the theory.
I also don't want a Three Mile Island/Chernobyl in my state.
>
>A Google listing of articles showing the EPA's denial of coal mining
>permits. http://tinyurl.com/5uz6r3f
Good for the EPA, there is no such thing as "clean coal."
>The US and other industrialized nations consume a lot of oil and will
>continue to do so long after I'm toes up.
Or until the supply runs out. Oil is a finite resource.
And it's getting harder and more expensive to find.
A1...@gmail.com
du...@harvarduniversity.edu" <fost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Your own "God" has admitted that there has been ZERO climate change in
>the last 15 years!!