Yes Gotaknow is him.

Background. To save taxpayer’s money used to subsidize insurance on property located in areas prone to natural disasters, the state legislature passed the Beach Front Management law. In an attempt to explain the need for the law after a loud public outcry from the rich folks who owned beachfront property, USC held several siminars around the state to explain the purpose of the law. Experts from government, environmental agencies ,educational instutions, NASA, and private industry were brought in to answer questions.

NASA acientists showed satellite photos which showed that the earth had gone through several melt downs and ice ages. These pictures showed that at one time the Atlantic Ocean came all the way in to the Appalachian Mts. After an ice age of unknown duration, another meltdown brought the Atlantic Ocean in about half way between the Appalachian Mts. and the present coast line. This area is delineated in the photos by the massive swamps that run thru the Carolinas, GA and FLA. Based on these ancient shore lines it was projected that during the present meltdown the ocean would rise another 14 feet before the next ice age began. Therefore, to prevent public money from being wasted on insuring houses which would be under water within 50 to 100 years, a “dead zone” was established where construction and rebuilding was prohibited.

Needless to say, this law was overturned by a judge after a Mt. Pleasant, (Charleston) SC property owner sued when his million dollar beachfront lot was included in the ‘Dead Zone.”

All this was before the global warming scare. And all these experts agreed that the ancient shorelines in the NASA photos were actual shorelines. So freeze ups and meltdowns are natural phenomina and there ain’t nothing that man can do about it. I find it amusing that man, in his egotistical, self centered, “I am equal to God” world, thinks he can alter the forces of nature. The God that made it will see to it that man doesn’t destroy it unless he wants it destroyed.

I stopped paying attention to whining maricons (there’s some good Spanish for YOU) a long time ago.

I don’t know who the f*** “Ken” is – but it isn’t me.

It’s about wealth transfer. Incomplete science, which is no better than junk science, is being used to support wealth transfer. The media doesn’t bother to point out the obvious – that the climate is constantly changing and that the scientists themse…

I completely agree with IVEHADIT — it’s the creeping trans-nationalism or globalism that’s behind much of this, and of course money. The euros are morphing into the EU, but are still mostly secondary players in world affairs. But thru the UN and other faceless, trans-national organizations, these smug, elitist, and often corrupt bureaucrats get to influence the use of US assets and more power than they deserve. Of course, liberals and elitist lefties in our country are joined at the hip with these euros and socialist, enviro whackos. And you can’t forget about the $. These “scientists” and assorted organizations hype the threat because they are the experts and they/we need more studies and tests and regulations, and taxes and … on and on so they get the govt grants and subsidies, and it cycles on. You’ve heard the NASA employee (scientist?) say that he was pressured or harassed by Bush admin to not speak about global warming, … well, he actually spoke quite freely all he wanted. The reality is the exact opposite — scientists and others looking at GW realistically and in a factual, logical sense are ridiculed, smeared and misquoted.

Looking at Pielke’s site, I also noted one Jim Hansen referenced there. No surpirse — he’s on the green brigade.

Just a a point to ponder, we have had for many years now mobile nuclear power plants, it is known as the US Navy.

We have lost two nuclear submarines in deep water and the ocean didn’t dry up all fish still live there.

The russians have had more.

Also a little know fact is that we are each year obtaining from Russia under the Salt Treaties and other agreements weapons grade material for disposal, actually reprocessing down to fuel civilian reactors, the material from all the weapons being placed out of service due to weapons reduction agreements.

I would suggest that we would be better served to have that material reprocessed down less and civilian reactors use higher enrichment material since it would expand drastically the amount of time between refuelings of of civilian plants.

Currently the amount of material being kept in very poor quality sites in the Russian country is enough to supply our country with all the uranium we need for the next 30 years without anyone needing to mine a single pound of uranium on the entire planet even if we up our number of nuclear plants by a factor of five.

It is also true to me the treaty requirements, the amount of material to be recycled is growing much faster than the reuse concept.

We are obligated by the treaties to provide hundreds of millions of dollars per year to support this effort.

Why not use it to increase our use of nuclear power generation to offset other technologies.

It is available, it doesn’t have to be considered wishful thinking pie in the sky and we have many trained personnel to work with the technology.

Most people in this country have no clue that the “nuclear waste” generated from plants is not fuel remnants. It is such mundane stuff as tools that were contaminated above the limits imposed and used protective clothing and other materials used to maintain the plants.

The actual fuel is reprocessed to create new fuel.

It is like suggesting eliminate cars, since your mechanic gets a dirty hand rag changing the oil on your car.

There are major misconceptions that exist in this world which are exploited to the max.

It helps to persuade the sheep.

Lets just require every city on the oceans edge to install desalinization plants to dispose of the ocean rise with all the water from the ocean intake.

Don’t raise the bridge lower the river.

Snark off/

Just heard this quote from Chirac (paraphrasing)
Kyoto is the first step toward truly global governance.

Ya got that? GLOBAL GOVERNANCE.

Wake up and smell the America Haters.

And btw, capitalism is the best system on the face of the earth for citizens having the opportunity to reach their highest potential and/or dreams.

I despise global socialists, for misery loves miserable company.

The effort to create a stable government in the region would pay off in the long term. Even Clinton felt that way. And what is more this thread is about global warming. The need of the left to mourn the end of Saddam’s sadistic regime in any and all contexts is really tiresome.

I think that global warming is a natural phenomenon and one the world has seen many times before. That does not mean however that man is not contributing to it in some marginal way. But people like our sooothie here are too busy frothing at the mouth to come up with any kind of realistic alternatives.

As for Iraq, we were spending billions just to fly the no fly zones over Iraq, dealing with Saddam was not free. In fact if it had not been for people like Soothie poo here we could have taken care of the dictator years ago and spared hundreds of thousands of people their lives in the 90′s.

so while Sooothi yearns for the happy days when Saddam pulled off the biggest heist in history with the help of corrupt UN officials and our planes were getting shot at while they burned tons and tons of fuel flying in circles over Iraq…none of that helps deal with the issues we face now today. it is just noise.

http://climatesci.colorado.edu/

In particular, read the article entitled:

January 31, 2007
“A Personal Call For Modesty, Integrity, and Balance by Hendrik Tennekes”

I really don’t know why you would ask the question:

Uhh Dude, where we gonna be able to build’em?

Critical fission reactors are the most common type of nuclear reactor, producing neutrons by fission of fuel atoms used to induce yet more fissions (the chain reaction) to sustain a controllable energy release. Critical fission reactors typically involve taking advantage of either the heat or the neutrons produced by the fission chain reaction, most commonly:

power reactors intended to produce heat for nuclear power; or

breeder reactors intended to produce nuclear fuels in bulk from more abundant isotopes, most comonly making plutonium 239 from the naturally very abundant uranium 238.

The problem with fission reactors is they generate a great deal of radiation, the controlled fission can become uncontrolled (China syndrome), and they produce radioactive waste. Nobody wants a fission reactor in their back yard.

Fusion, on the other hand, does not require radioactive materials. Two atoms of hydrogen combine to form one atom of helium, and in the process gives off a great deal of energy. Fusion reactions, however, have not yet been successfully harnessed in a manner to exploit their vast potential for power production.

In theory, fusion reactors would be clean, virtually free energy once started, without radioactive waste, and could, in fact, be used to dispose of nuclear waster. I do not foresee insoluble problems with placing fusion plants once the population is educated.