You're wrong. In fact, 60 votes are only needed to invoke cloture, not to pass the bill. And getting 60 votes on cloture is 1) a different question, and 2) a lot easier than getting 60 votes on the bill itself. I don't know if it cloture will be achieved. It's quite possible that the Republicans will attempt to filibuster (something that they said was undemocratic just a few short years ago.) However, as I said, whether or not legislation ever passes in the US, the argument in the rest of the world has moved on. In the scientific world the skeptics are a fringe element started by the oil companies who have since gone off on their own, like the moon-landing-was-a-hoax crowd. They'll never be eliminated as there's always a few nuts.
Thank you. That provided a good, hearty laugh. "Supposedly, radiation which goes around a greenhouse gas at the present time stops going around it when the amount of greenhouse gas increases..." Hilarious! Another great part: "Increasing the amount of a greenhouse gas does not widen its absorption bandwidth, because unusual energy states for the molecules determine the bandwidth, and increasing the amount of the gas does not change the energy state of the molecules." That's great stuff.
1. The pseudo-intellectuals fell for it because none of them ever cracked a science book. 2. The policy wonks fell for it because it gave the government more control. 3. The bleeding hearts fell for it because they always want to save the Earth. 4. The communists fell for it because it portrayed capitalists as destroying the Earth to make money. 5. The capitalists fell for it because they saw a new way to make money. 6. The Hollywood crowd fell for it because it made their pampered lives seem to have a meaning and purpose. 7. The newspapers fell for it because it was new. 8. The teachers fell for it because it was a new thing to teach the children to teach their parents. 9. The children fell for it because they wanted to show how well they are doing in school. 10. The parents fell for it because they wanted their children were doing so well in school and they wanted to be supportive. 11. The utility companies fell or it because they can raise rates. 12. The Nobel Peace Prize committee fell for it because Al Gore should have won in 2000. 13. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences fell for it because Al Gore should have won in 2000. 14. The National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (Grammys) fell for it because Al Gore should have won in 2000. 15. The 30,000 scientists fell for it because while it was not in their field of study, they wanted to be supportive of science.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. An exerpt from the conference. "My view is that the problem is more likely to be solved by technological innovation than by the political process, not that they are entirely independent, since, for example, politicians can decide to promote innovation," said Kerry Emanuel, professor of atmospheric science at MIT. One idea off the bat is nuclear energy, Emanuel said in an e-mail interview. "The solution to the problem is greatly retarded by the lack of scientific and technological awareness in certain societies, notably the U.S, where superstitions and political passions often trump sound reasoning," Emanuel said. "For example, we could make great strides toward energy independence and reduction of greenhouse emissions by undertaking a serious program of nuclear energy, which can easily supply our energy needs for 100 years. Are you f'n kidding me? These are the same dopes that condemned nuclear energy in the 70's and now it's part of the answer. Had we just ignored these idiot fucks 40 years ago...problem solved. It only goes to prove, this whole climate change scam ain't about the climate, it's about money and politics. BUILD NUKE PLANTS NOW!!!! And when some "save the planet" retard lays down in front of the contruction equipment, run over their stupid ass. These god damn people are nuts!!!
Nuclear would have been widely adopted, 40 years ago, if not for the waste problem, and mishaps. It has taken 40 years of innovation to present a plausibly safe model. Come to think of it, I've read about the safety issues being dealt with, but I don't know the current proposed solution to the waste problem...
Wasn't there another leak just a few weeks ago? The solution to the waste problem seems to be "give the waste to the government."
Yes, and rather than working to solve those problems, politicans gave in to the hysterical rants of the environmental loons and put eveything on the back burner. Now we're 40 f'n years behind the times. I've got a great place to despose of the waste. The halls of congress!
Rather than just complain, why don't you form a group to fight to get a nuclear plant in your neighborhood?