South Dakota House Passes HRC 1009!

[Hew]

The problem is that those same businesses are making their own judgments when they pollute our environment without cost of liability for consequential damages. It was common, and understandable, 100 years ago and even 50 years ago to assume that nature's ability to absorb what man does without long term consequences. There is no excuse for making similar assumptions today. We have learned too much about how easy it is to damage our world.

30 to 40 years or so ago environmentalists/scientists pushed us to decide that nuclear power was not the way to go...too dangerous, concerns about the waste, etc. So instead of relatively clean nuclear powered electricity we now have fuel-burning electrical plants all over the country that are the largest producers of CO2. So you'll please forgive me if I cast a suspicious eye towards the same people who largely got us where we are today when they propose to save us (yet again) from ourselves. They were wrong about the dangers of nuclear power. They were wrong about the supposed coming ice age. Fool me three times....

[YardleyLabs]

30 to 40 years or so ago environmentalists/scientists pushed us to decide that nuclear power was not the way to go...too dangerous, concerns about the waste, etc. So instead of relatively clean nuclear powered electricity we now have fuel-burning electrical plants all over the country that are the largest producers of CO2. So you'll please forgive me if I cast a suspicious eye towards the same people who largely got us where we are today when they propose to save us (yet again) from ourselves. They were wrong about the dangers of nuclear power. They were wrong about the supposed coming ice age. Fool me three times....

Those same environmentalists also convinced us not to continue dumping untreated waste into our oceans and rivers so that it is now actually possible to eat fish caught near my house without dying (as long as you don't eat too many). They also created the pressures that led to dramatic cleanups of air pollution so that there are fewer days when schools have to close to avoid poisoning our children. On the issue of nuclear energy, I believe you are both right and wrong as were environmentalists. 40 years ago incompetence from the operators of three mile island resulted in discharges that threatened the population surrounding Philadelphia. The fact that it did not turn out as badly as in Russia was not through any "fault" of the operators. And today we face significant problems because we have still not figured out how to handle the waste products from reactors over the next few thousand years until they are no longer deadly. In my own hometown of Oak Ridge, that led to a multi-billion dollar cleanup industry. But my father and most of his friends who worked in those early reactors seem to have died quite young from cancer. I believe that nuclear energy represents one of our best options for low carbon footprint energy production. But we must never forget the cost of even small mistakes in the management of reactors and reactor waste, and we still need to make sure we design to manage thermal pollution generated by the plants.

[dnf777]

Didn't Nancy Reagan admit to using psychics (not coffee enemas! )and astrologers before influencing her husband's decisions?

Aside, I'm surprised that whoever wrote that bill gave no mention to soothsayers, tea-leaves, and tarot cards! Sounds like their lack of scientific knowledge is rivaled only by their lack of command of the english language

[Pete]

Buzz
Astrology is the perverted black art of the stars. It isnt science. Could have been a goof.
Astronomy is a science

Pete