Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:And how is this not a legitimate point? (Score 1) 243

But then the popular vote would make the bigger states more important than the smaller states.

Small swing vote states are that way because they have an electorate that vote on the issues, and sit on the fence between the 2 parties every election.

Many if not all the large states are mostly slanted 1 way. It would be the same with the popular vote.

You do remember that the USA is a republic and that states come first, then the union.

Comment Re:And how is this not a legitimate point? (Score 1) 243

So... the top 8 or 10 states should have ultimate control over the other 50?

Popular vote means people living in over half the states geographically would have no say in the election.

The EC makes sure realities in different parts of the country are taken into consideration.

What goes for NY might not be what Iowa needs.

Comment Re:cost (Score 2, Informative) 201

All power plants, all over the world, have a strong history of incidents. Because they are major undertakings and they generate... POWER.

The French incidents have had no fatalities and have been dealt with efficiently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

In fact, there are very few, historically, nuclear incidents with fatalities. Not so with ANY other power generating technologies, including solar and especially Wind.

Comment Re:And I keep coming back to my same question (Score 1) 693

Senator Whitehouse
AG Loretta Lynch
17 AGs from 15 states, the Virgin Islands and DC
Bill Nye
Michael Mann
Some representatives of the California state legislature
AND scientists:
Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO
T.N. Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
Ben Kirtman, University of Miami, Miami, FL
Robert Dickinson, University of Texas, Austin, TX
Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY
Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford, VT

Comment Re:But not climate change research (Score 1) 81

So you are basically saying. You have nothing to prove your assertion.

Because I do not believe your blind assertion, I do not qualify?

The supposed consensus is about the earth warming and it "possibly" being caused by humans. And even that consensus is shaky at best.

There i NO concensus at all, about your assertion of thing being really bad or catastrophic, except in the media and young brainwashed eco greenies.

So again, show me the consensus that proves your assertion. Your word, does not count.

Comment Re:But not climate change research (Score 1) 81

There is no such consensus.

Please prove your assertion that " has a consensus that it is going to be at least pretty bad and may well get catastrophic".

You see, you lie or repeat lies without even knowing it, which makes it much worse, because thats called ignorance.

Its people who argument/debate like you do, without knowledge who are the most dangerous.

Comment Re:Not quite... (Score 1) 222

Yes, and they all increased significantly the cost of energy in the EU to the point of it being a major political problem.

With the Brexit and the uncertainties regarding EU subsidies for "green" energy projects, Siemens has decided to halt all wind projects in the UK.

Because the reality is, those projects are just NOT viable without heavy taxpayer subsidies.

Slashdot Top Deals

Overflow on /dev/null, please empty the bit bucket.

Working...