Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’

MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
vegmom said:
Because he's a pol-i-ti-cian deary. The only difference between the party we vote for and the party we vote against is which one pisses us off less.
Click to expand...

Next time you wonder why people don't listen to Gore's stupid movie and the other made up facts, don't ask why. Remember what you wrote here instead.

If this was really an environmental issue, would they have picked a politician to head up the effort? Or maybe a scientist?
 
Sonsie

Sonsie

The mighty Al-Sonsie!
OMG! I knew it! This is all the fault of you lousy MEN! :jameo:

Are men to blame for global warming?

Even climate change cannot escape the gender wars. Now Swedish men are being blamed for having a disproportionately large impact on global warming.

The finger is squarely pointed at men in "A study on gender equality as a prerequisite for sustainable development" by Gerd Johnsson-Latham of the Swedish Ministry of Sustainable Development. She concludes: "The fact that women travel less than men, measured in person-kilometres per car, plane, boat and motorcycle - means that women cause considerably fewer carbon dioxide emissions than men, and thus considerably less climate change." LINK​
 
High EGT

High EGT

Gort! Klaatu barada nikto
Sonsie said:
OMG! I knew it! This is all the fault of you lousy MEN! :jameo:

Are men to blame for global warming?

Even climate change cannot escape the gender wars. Now Swedish men are being blamed for having a disproportionately large impact on global warming.

The finger is squarely pointed at men in "A study on gender equality as a prerequisite for sustainable development" by Gerd Johnsson-Latham of the Swedish Ministry of Sustainable Development. She concludes: "The fact that women travel less than men, measured in person-kilometres per car, plane, boat and motorcycle - means that women cause considerably fewer carbon dioxide emissions than men, and thus considerably less climate change." LINK​
Click to expand...

My wife would agree and has accused me more then once of producing high levels of methane, especially at the most inopportune times.
“Just doing my part honey to rid us of cold weather”
Click to expand...
.
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
vegmom said:
Nuke engery does not spew crap into the air, but there is the issue of toxic waste disposal and securing the spent fuel.
Click to expand...

The earth has survived countless catastrophic events. It will survive us.

vegmom said:
CO2 would not be an issue if we had the vegetation to balance it out.
Click to expand...

I watched a show (don’t remember the name of it) on the Science Channel (I think that was the channel). It was about giant dinosaurs of the late Cretaceous period. They demanded huge amounts of oxygen and expelled huge amounts of CO2. They were plant eaters. Scientists were wondering how plant life survived with such huge animals eating and the resulting poor amount of oxygen. They knew there had to be a large amount of CO2 with an imbalance of oxygen. So they were wondering how the dinosaurs got enough oxygen. They did an experiment by putting plants in a controlled room with high concentrations of CO2. They were surprised to see that the plant life not only grew larger but also more abundantly.

In other words… if there is excessive CO2, plant life will flourish. The result will be more oxygen. Balance! Isn’t this earth we live on cool?
 
ylexot

ylexot

Super Genius
vegmom said:
Nuke engery does not spew crap into the air, but there is the issue of toxic waste disposal and securing the spent fuel.
Click to expand...

Yucca Mountain :shrug:

Now, if only the environuts would let us do some research, we could reduce the waste...

Interesting find in Wiki:
Radioactive waste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There have been proposals for reactors that consume nuclear waste and transmute it to other, less-harmful nuclear waste. In particular, the Integral Fast Reactor was a proposed nuclear reactor with a nuclear fuel cycle that produced no transuranic waste and in fact, could consume transuranic waste. It proceeded as far as large-scale tests but was then canceled by the U.S. Government. Another approach, considered safer but requiring more development, is to dedicate subcritical reactors to the transmutation of the left-over transuranic elements.

While transmutation has been banned in the US since 1977 due to the danger of plutonium proliferation, work on the method continues in the EU. This has resulted in a practical nuclear research reactor called Myrrha in which transmutation is possible. Additionally, a new research program called ACTINET has been started in the EU to make transmutation possible on a large, industrial scale.

There have also been theoretical studies involving the use of fusion reactors as so called "actinide burners" where a fusion reactor plasma such as in a tokamak, could be "doped" with a small amount of the "minor" transuranic atoms which would be transmuted (meaning fissioned in the actinide case) to lighter elements upon their successive bombardment by the very high energy neutrons produced by the fusion of deuterium and tritium in the reactor. It was recently found by a study done at MIT, that only 2 or 3 fusion reactors with parameters similar to that of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) could transmute the entire annual minor actinide production from all of the light water reactors presently operating in the United States fleet while simultaneously generating approximately 1 gigawatt of power from each reactor.
Click to expand...
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
More Karma Cowards...

Global Warming... 11-09-2007 07:49 AM and the dinosaur is now extinct. great example!

Why didn't you have the courage to post this rather than a hit-and-run Karma post?

The laws of nature and physics have not changed. So what's your point?
 
LordStanley

LordStanley

I know nothing
PsyOps said:
Global Warming... 11-09-2007 07:49 AM and the dinosaur is now extinct. great example!

Why didn't you have the courage to post this rather than a hit-and-run Karma post?

The laws of nature and physics have not changed. So what's your point?
Click to expand...

I guess they forgot about the part that the dinosaurs were killed by a large meteor???
 
itsbob

itsbob

I bowl overhand
vegmom said:
Nuke engery does not spew crap into the air, but there is the issue of toxic waste disposal and securing the spent fuel.

CO2 would not be an issue if we had the vegetation to balance it out.
Click to expand...

The moon sounds like a good place to send the spent rods..

But look at the size weight of the spent rods acompared to the TONS of pollutants a single coal plant puts into the air..

Do you know a coal plant (being much less regulated) spews about 10 times more radiation into the atmoshere then does a nuke plant??
 
ylexot

ylexot

Super Genius
Heck, you could use a electromagnetic rail gun...with the energy supplied by a nuke plant :yay:
 
LordStanley

LordStanley

I know nothing
Not to be the negitive Nancy here, but every once in a while those rockets blow up. We'd be pretty eff, if it happened when it was full of fuel rods
 
Toxick

Toxick

Splat
LordStanley said:
Not to be the negitive Nancy here, but every once in a while those rockets blow up. We'd be pretty eff, if it happened when it was full of fuel rods
Click to expand...



You put the rods in a box made of the same material as the Black Box in an airplane.

That crap is indestructible.





Come to think of it, why don't they make the entire rocket out of that material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top