That should have read: "There's your jetsons". The word "you're" is a contraction of the two words "you are". That is the same sort of sloppy thinking that makes you (and people like you) reject the nearly free power that breeder reactors could have been supplying the U.S. by now.
Modern and futuristic architecture used to be considered pretty. But that was before reality TV and Entertainment Tonight and MTV. Back when we had Jack Paar instead of Letterman.
For us in the U.S. anyway, there is no need to worry about a sharp transision. It will just mean the elimination of any restrictions on drilling; there will be many offshore platforms off the coasts where before they were banned. BFD.
And also, they will eventually find the only right way to boost production from Iraq.
| It turns out every big SUV and pickup is too heavy for my street. | Here's just a sampling: The Chevy Suburban and Tahoe, the Range Rover, | the GMC Yukon, the Toyota Land Cruiser and Sequoia, the | Lincoln Navigator, the Mercedes M Class, the Porsche Cayenne S, | and the Dodge Ram 1500 pickup (with optional Hemi). | What about the Hummer, you ask? Hasta la vista, baby!
google finds me an audio version, for the lazy of reading:
formatting link
and google again:
formatting link
Yes, the oil barrons have gotten the white house. But at the same time, China and India have emerged into highly industrialized states. In the gas shortages of the 70s, the chinese were not all striving to each have their own cars. Repeat this around the world. Oh, and large sources of oil HAVE dried up. Shell(?) took a hit when they admitted that field's they'd been pumping for years were less productive that previously.
And she can. Esp if she hauls around 50 kids.
I ride a motorcycle on a 60 mile per day commute and I'm regularly appalled at the number of 16MPG HUGE trucks and cars with 1 person in it (usually on a cell phone too. And sitting in the leftmost lane with people trying to get around them. We must teach people to be EMBARRASSED that people are passing them on the right. "oh my, I didn't realize. My mistake. I'll get right over.")
I agree completely. Why would anyone want to utilize free and plentiful sun light when we can make large, high-maintenance nuclear plants whose fuels require expensive mining and refinement. Not only do they produce cheap nuclear waste that won't dissipate for thousands of years, but you won't need night lights because everyone will glow in the dark! Plus, where would we get our super-heroes without nuclear radiation? If everyone was using solar panels, New York City would have been destroyed by Doctor Octopus! When will someone smack some sense into these sloppy-thinking, mis-spelling liberal wimps!?
My post was mainly satirical (hoped I wouldn't have to explain that). However, the parent was actually serious about his drivel. Modern nuclear technology can be extremely clean but it can't hold a candle to
100% clean solar, wind, and geothermal energy sources, which the parent seems to think should just be ignored in the face of expensive, complex, and volatile breeder reactors. There's a reason why breeders aren't the standard in nuclear technology, and it isn't just due to fears over Plutonium proliferation.
I guess there's just no winning this game. 90% of the population has been mesmerized by the retardation rays coming out of the TV for 40 years; 9% of the poulation has succumbed to witchcraft/nature-worship and hatred of anything that requires thought and self-discipline.
I guess there's just no winning this game. 90% of the population has been mesmerized by the retardation rays coming out of the TV for 40 years; 9% of the population has succumbed to witchcraft/nature-worship and hatred of anything that requires thought and self-discipline.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.