To: Elmer Phud who wrote (37610 ) 8/9/2008 12:54:55 AM From: Math Junkie Read Replies (1) | Respond to "I too have an engineering background and decades of experience. That's why I know that I'm not qualified to debate the science of Global Warming. "But I am qualified to observe that there is debate and one side, in almost a childish manner, is claiming that no responsible scientist disagrees with them. "Apparently defining 'responsible' as someone who shares their view. That's immature and not needed when searching for the truth. "The other organization is however a political one and injecting politics is part of the problem. "It might be of interest to you to read some of the comments by scientists who's work was cited by the IPCC and reported as drawing the exact opposite conclusions that the scientists themselves concluded in their findings. "Regardless of the question of Global Warming and to what extent human activity may or may not be responsible, it is unfathomable how anyone can ignore the 100s of millions of tons of CO2 plus 10s of thousands of tons of uranium and thorium dumped into the atmosphere by coal fired plants every year because of irrational fears of nuclear power plants. If Global Warming is a result of human activity, where better to attack the problem than to remove this enormous source of greenhouse gases? Even if global warming is not a result of human activity (not my claim) then who wants to breath from coal fired plants, 10,000 times more uranium and thorium than emitted by all nuclear accidents and testing combined? There is simply no avoiding the conclusion that any alternative to nuclear power poses far more dangers than what the alarmists are trying to avoid, safe, clean, cheap, limitless nuclear power. "
