or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by anantksundaram

Sadly, you sound quite uninformed, just parroting some typical talking points one often hears from the political right on this issue. Hard to take that seriously. Especially when they've lost the argument scientifically and legally.Here's something from the WSJ that explains how and why, and specific context in which CO2 is classified as a 'pollutant.' You can choose to inform yourself, or you can't. That's up to you. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124001537515830975
I agree. But before that can be done, a couple of tens of billions of dollars need to be spent to create demonstration projects around the globe. (The last one -- abandoned midway -- was over fifty years ago by Oak Ridge National Labs).Fortunately, Norway, India, and China are starting on a couple of major demonstration efforts, the earliest of which is expected to come to fruition in 2017 or so.The other very viable technology is to reprocess the spent nuclear rods (which...
What a laughably self-referential set of responses. Answers include questions in response to a question ("ask yourself...."), bland assertions in place of argumentation ("adding complexity is never the answer"), restatement of previously argued points ("my explanation is more than sufficient"), and silly grandiosity for good measure ("...no declaration, whatever its origins, can change nature and the meaning of words for that matter.")Way to go!
1) I know what you think. The question was not put to you. 2) Um... what?
Good thing I waited to respond. Looks like you added a lot to your original post (the one I saw in my email a while ago, and am able to respond only now). 1) What you claim is a 'political' declaration was made by the US Supreme Court, during the Bush era, with a majority conservative make-up. Are they 'political' or ruling on a matter of law? I've noticed people fling this accusation all the time, especially about decisions with which they disagree. It's just possible...
Ah, baiting. The classic last resort of the intellectually clueless and insecure. (There are a couple of others who do do this in the Forum fairly often).No bite.
Oh boy, TS, it always seems to descend into pointless political crap with your posts.I'll desist, in the interests of not derailing (or boring) the thread.
What does driving an electric or a hybrid have to do with "globalists"? Who are they, anyway? Do they also include people who care about the impact of global terrorism, outsourcing, immigration, or Ebola across borders? Or only those who worry about stuff, you know, like the Left cares about, e.g., pollution and inequality across borders?As to 'truth' I tend to leave that to higher powers. I happen to live in a world of laws.
A number of things require correction in your post. (And I have no idea what you mean by '4 or 5 times as efficient').1) Both the US Supreme Court and thr EPA would disagree with you about CO2 not being 'pollution.' In a famous 2007 court ruling, the SCOTUS ruled precisely that it is, thereby giving the EPA explicit authority to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gases. You can look it up. It's the letter of the law. Period.2) There's lots of analysis comparing hybrids and...
Not just most. All. At least in the US, Canada, and a lot countries in the EU.
New Posts  All Forums: