Appeasement policy towards climate change

tycho102 · 04-06-07, 01:26 PM

As long as it gets us off oil and onto nuclear (with core reprocessing), I'm all for it. Regardless of whatever kind of left-wing granola nutjob fantasy it may be, I totally support global warming. The Kyoto Protocol, the United Nations, Kofi the Korrupt. All of it.

I want us off oil.

It should have been the last damn generation that got us off oil in 1974. They didn't. The issue went to Jimbo Baby Mcgibbits, and he went right along with Ford in banning reactors to "stop" proliferation. Never mind Pakistan, China, and AQ Khan -- by God, America has done it's part to stop the spread of nuclear weapon design and fission material.

So, here we are today. If it costs $15 trillion to move to nuclear energy and hydrogen in 2010, it will cost $50 trillion in 2025. That's the amount of money I estimate.

04-06-07, 01:26 PM	#9
tycho102 Ace of the Deep Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 1,100 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	As long as it gets us off oil and onto nuclear (with core reprocessing), I'm all for it. Regardless of whatever kind of left-wing granola nutjob fantasy it may be, I totally support global warming. The Kyoto Protocol, the United Nations, Kofi the Korrupt. All of it. I want us off oil. It should have been the last damn generation that got us off oil in 1974. They didn't. The issue went to Jimbo Baby Mcgibbits, and he went right along with Ford in banning reactors to "stop" proliferation. Never mind Pakistan, China, and AQ Khan -- by God, America has done it's part to stop the spread of nuclear weapon design and fission material. So, here we are today. If it costs $15 trillion to move to nuclear energy and hydrogen in 2010, it will cost $50 trillion in 2025. That's the amount of money I estimate.