npts2020

The bringing of the world on the back of a turtle is a part of South Sea (Polynesian?) mythology, I merely embellished a little with the turtle soup.

Jackson33; I am likely to be one of those people you refer to wanting to change society because of my advocacy for bringing our transportation system into the 21st century by automating it and using wind and solar energy to power the whole thing. In addition, I advocate stringing a new power grid and other utilities in the same system. Global climate change is only one of the many good reasons to do this and is only briefly mentioned and never given serious discussion in the tens of thousands of words I have written when presenting arguments in favor of my projects. I have never been shy about admitting that all of this requires a "political agenda" but saying things like that gets us no closer to the right or wrong way of thinking about any given topic. My biggest questions to those who think that spending any money to try preventing climate change is a waste are; What is the worst thing that can happen if they are right and it just ends up being an expensive insurance policy? and What is the worst thing that can happen if they are wrong and the worst climate change scenarios end up actually playing out? and Which one is worse?

All of that seems plausible to me but that is still a long way from actually being possible.

Of course they speak in likelihoods and probabilities, human nature is being talked about. Two humans will frequently do opposite things when presented identical situations. That makes any statement like "absolute power corrupts absolutely" patently false because it only applies generally and not in every case. The authors, in fact, talk about exceptions to the rule where the perception of not having or being deserving of power acts as a restraint but I see nowhere that this is claimed to be the only factor. Perhaps my reading comprehension is faulty but I could not see the "proof" for such a broad, all-encompassing statement. The greater factor IMHO is that it is far easier to obtain power by being corrupt and corrupt individuals are usually the ones to seek it.

This article simply states the obvious; that power can corrupt and that the greater the power the greater the corruption. However, it comes nowhere near stating this as an absolute, in fact, it doesn't even try to quantify much other than to say this or that is more likely to occur. If we assume that corruption=hypocrisy, as is done in this article, then it can be overcome in an open and democratic society, if it is unacceptable to the populace. Even if the statement about corruption from power applies to a substantial majority of people, an observant public can keep those who are not corrupted in power. Now all we need to do is find somewhere that has an open and democratic society with an observant public.

Jackson33; One thing you have mentioned at least twice now that nobody seems to have addressed is that humans grow plants for their own use and you claim that it helps sequester CO2, which is true. However, nearly anywhere we grow plants for our own use there would be some growing there anyway, without any human input. Unless you are claiming that the plants we grow for agriculture are better at sequestering CO2 than the ones that would grow there naturally, there should be little difference. I don't think I am going too far out on a limb to say if there is a difference, it should be the other way around. Plants that grow naturally are rarely killed by harvesting or other cause before they die naturally after a full life cycle. I will look for the source but IIRC agricultural land is rarely as efficient a CO2 sink as it would be if left fallow. Sorry if it seems like I am "piling on" but I think this point is important Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedA recent reference for what I am talking about.

I can't believe any list of the past decade doesn't have something about computers or nanotechnology.

Water vapor from burning hydrogen is easily condensed.

Maybe we could trade for some good drugs.

Two points. Firstly, in most places you don't even have to have an ID to register to vote. It can be done by mail. Secondly, is that it would be surprising if ACORN did not register predominately Democrats, considering the areas and demographic groups targeted for registration

Thanks for the links iNow, definitely some fat to chew on. Seems like there are so many CFR's is because somebody already tried something like what I suggested above.

Doggonit, always someone a step ahead of me. The point of that outburst was exactly what constitutes having coverage? Can I get a plan that costs a small fraction of whatever penalty is going to be imposed, even if it is crappy and won't really cover anything or is there some minimum standard?

Nationalized health care would solve the problem of tort reform since any medical expenses from a resulting injury will already be covered. As for the percentages, take whatever figure you are using and divide it into the $2 trillion we spend every year on health care (let me know what your result is). This $2 trillion figure is more than double what any other nation on Earth spends per capita. All that money for a system that ranks near the bottom of the developed world by any measure you care to use. iNow; Thanks for the graph & info in post #54. Let me know when your premiums start going down.

I wonder if the same thing was done to lawyers or accountants in this country, how many of them would be giving confidential advice to their clients to get around the law by questionable means as well?

Also global warming lags behind the carbon dioxide increases.

If you don't use a liquid similar in viscosity to water, how are you going to get it to flow back together when the laser burns a hole through it? How much added weight to the missile are you going to have? Even if you could find your magical substance, it seems highly unlikely to me that it could be used in the manner you are proposing because of weight and aerodynamic considerations.

Cheer up, there are only 24 Greek letters.

C'mon now, since when do we ever let facts get in the way of a good lynchin'?

In a vacuum, what exactly could be polarized?

There is nothing in any of those links that tell me I couldn't start the insurance company I refer to and then call myself insured for federal tax purposes. I will be very interested when the final version of the bill is published to see exactly what sort of "oversight" there is.

Turtle soup in remembrance of the great flying turtle that brought the world here. Our ancestors ate the turtle afterwards, doncha know?

I am thinking of starting a health insurance company. The payments will be $5/month for administration with 100% copayment fees. What is to stop me from doing so and then saying I am insured?

Today is Christmas, everyone enjoy their holiday weekend. From my facebook page's daily *rant* for today. Christmas *rant*; Christmas comes but once a year Filling us all with holiday cheer Why can't we do it every day Improve the world in some small way

I may be mistakenly recalling the service generator (electrical) output rather than reactor's total output of energy. Like I say it has been a long time since I really had to think about it.

insane_alien; It has been 30 years since I was doing the same job as ydoaPs but IIRC the power of a reactor on a carrier is closer to 1 or 2 MW than 300. (might be classified info but the Navy never made me sign any kind of long-term nondisclosure agreement)