On Nov 27, 9:14*am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 7:09 am, John H wrote:
...than some of the naysayers in this crowd.

"The Obama administration and leading Democrats, in an effort to win
greater support for climate change legislation, are eyeing federal tax
incentives and loan guarantees to fund a new crop of nuclear power
plants across the United States that could eventually help drive down
carbon emissions. "

http://tinyurl.com/y8msqx7

or:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/11/23/AR200....
--

John H

Some of the people in "this crowd" have enough sense to not post
political bull**** after political bull**** after political bull****
to a boating newsgroup....

Lighten up Loogie.
I didn't see this post as political. The topic of nuclear power is one
that has pros and cons and is a hot topic. All alternative energy is
expensive but once in place Nuclear is probably cheaper to maintain than
solar or wind. I am concerned about what to do with the waste but
science will solve that problem, I'm sure.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

But scientists don't know anything. We need to listen to Rush,
Hannity, and the GOP.

Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 9:14 am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 7:09 am, John H wrote:
...than some of the naysayers in this crowd.
"The Obama administration and leading Democrats, in an effort to win
greater support for climate change legislation, are eyeing federal tax
incentives and loan guarantees to fund a new crop of nuclear power
plants across the United States that could eventually help drive down
carbon emissions. "
http://tinyurl.com/y8msqx7
or:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/11/23/AR200...
--
John H
Some of the people in "this crowd" have enough sense to not post
political bull**** after political bull**** after political bull****
to a boating newsgroup....
Lighten up Loogie.
I didn't see this post as political. The topic of nuclear power is one
that has pros and cons and is a hot topic. All alternative energy is
expensive but once in place Nuclear is probably cheaper to maintain than
solar or wind. I am concerned about what to do with the waste but
science will solve that problem, I'm sure.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

But scientists don't know anything. We need to listen to Rush,
Hannity, and the GOP.

Now who is talking political spin?

On Nov 27, 9:23*am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 9:14 am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 7:09 am, John H wrote:
...than some of the naysayers in this crowd.
"The Obama administration and leading Democrats, in an effort to win
greater support for climate change legislation, are eyeing federal tax
incentives and loan guarantees to fund a new crop of nuclear power
plants across the United States that could eventually help drive down
carbon emissions. "
http://tinyurl.com/y8msqx7
or:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/11/23/AR200....
--
John H
Some of the people in "this crowd" have enough sense to not post
political bull**** after political bull**** after political bull****
to a boating newsgroup....
Lighten up Loogie.
I didn't see this post as political. The topic of nuclear power is one
that has pros and cons and is a hot topic. All alternative energy is
expensive but once in place Nuclear is probably cheaper to maintain than
solar or wind. I am concerned about what to do with the waste but
science will solve that problem, I'm sure.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

But scientists don't know anything. We need to listen to Rush,
Hannity, and the GOP.

Now who is talking political spin?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Just replying. It's true. Take global warming for instance. Ask just
about any conservative. The scientists and all of the compiled data is
just plain stupid. Rush and Hannity say that global warming isn't
happening, so disregard all of that data, right?

In article a06b6f1a-9f26-4d40-b55c-28f71591fc23
@e23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Nov 27, 9:23*am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 9:14 am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 7:09 am, John H wrote:
...than some of the naysayers in this crowd.
"The Obama administration and leading Democrats, in an effort to win
greater support for climate change legislation, are eyeing federal tax
incentives and loan guarantees to fund a new crop of nuclear power
plants across the United States that could eventually help drive down
carbon emissions. "
http://tinyurl.com/y8msqx7
or:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/11/23/AR200...
--
John H
Some of the people in "this crowd" have enough sense to not post
political bull**** after political bull**** after political bull****
to a boating newsgroup....
Lighten up Loogie.
I didn't see this post as political. The topic of nuclear power is one
that has pros and cons and is a hot topic. All alternative energy is
expensive but once in place Nuclear is probably cheaper to maintain than
solar or wind. I am concerned about what to do with the waste but
science will solve that problem, I'm sure.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

But scientists don't know anything. We need to listen to Rush,
Hannity, and the GOP.

Now who is talking political spin?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Just replying. It's true. Take global warming for instance. Ask just
about any conservative. The scientists and all of the compiled data is
just plain stupid. Rush and Hannity say that global warming isn't
happening, so disregard all of that data, right?

Well, I am sure we can talk this out as long as the ICPP, Daily Kos, New
York Lies, Jon Stewart, line of "settled science" and the idea that a
majority of scientists are supporting the idea of man made heating, can
be dismissed too... Because there is no majority of scientists
supporting it, and so many of them have been caught fudging numbers..
The real question is why would any scientist make an assumption on
proven false information?

Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 9:23 am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 9:14 am, Jim wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 27, 7:09 am, John H wrote:
...than some of the naysayers in this crowd.
"The Obama administration and leading Democrats, in an effort to win
greater support for climate change legislation, are eyeing federal tax
incentives and loan guarantees to fund a new crop of nuclear power
plants across the United States that could eventually help drive down
carbon emissions. "
http://tinyurl.com/y8msqx7
or:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/11/23/AR200...
--
John H
Some of the people in "this crowd" have enough sense to not post
political bull**** after political bull**** after political bull****
to a boating newsgroup....
Lighten up Loogie.
I didn't see this post as political. The topic of nuclear power is one
that has pros and cons and is a hot topic. All alternative energy is
expensive but once in place Nuclear is probably cheaper to maintain than
solar or wind. I am concerned about what to do with the waste but
science will solve that problem, I'm sure.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But scientists don't know anything. We need to listen to Rush,
Hannity, and the GOP.
Now who is talking political spin?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Just replying. It's true. Take global warming for instance. Ask just
about any conservative. The scientists and all of the compiled data is
just plain stupid. Rush and Hannity say that global warming isn't
happening, so disregard all of that data, right?

Sorry, I'm not going there with you. I haven't seen any conclusive data
from either camp. And I don't listen to the talking heads.