[Bret L]

T. Boone Pickens’ “Problem” – Yea, Right!

Posted by Bob on July 19, 2009 at 12:40 pm


"Pickens says he has a transmission problem with the $10 billion wind-power project he was winding up for.

Thomas Edison had a real problem with his DC electric generation. That
was genuine and it happened over a century and a quarter ago. But
today you don’t do the specs for a local generator, let alone a major
project, without working all that out before it’s even submitted at
the lowest level.

Especially if you want to work for T. Boone. T Boone’s idea of a cozy
evening at home is for him and his wife to read stock reports to each
other.

Like T. Boone, I discovered that a Southern accent is the ultimate
weapon in dealing with the Smart Guys. He wanted to get in with the
new administration and the power brokers, so he took the leadership in
environmentally friendly power generation. They made him spokesman.

He offered them a ten billion dollar investment in wind power. Now, he
say, he has this “unexpected” problem with sending the power to
Dallas, so he has to rethink.

Yea, right. So now he has all the credit and this project will run
into endless unexpected problems so he can’t invest too much in it.
He’s just a dumb old Southern boy who happens to have money, so
Obama’s keepers probably will be satisfied."

http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2...%9d-yea-right/

[Trevor Wilson]

"Bret L" wrote in message
...
In other words, AGW is horse****.

**Well, no. Feel free to submit your evidence. Make certain it comes from a
reputable scientific source. Those whacko religious/right wing political
sources don't count. In your evidence, please explain how the glaciers in
Greenland are moving towards the sea at a rate which is much faster than a
few decades ago. Here's some cites that you need to refute:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0527121055.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet

http://images.google.com.au/images?h...title&resnum=4

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=3606

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/0...sea-level.html

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science...ing/index.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...glaciers-melti

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...aciers-melting

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...el-predicts-gr

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ise-sea-levels


OTOH, we may be in for an ice age,

**********. Complete ********, in fact. There is zero evidence of such a
thing. The TREND in world temepatures is clearly up. Year to year variations
are to be expected, but the TREND is up.

no matter what we do. In fact, doing nothing may be far better than
the wrong thing.

**More ********. Here's some stuff that we know (beyond any doubt):

* Since the dawn of the industrial revolution, CO2 levels have risen by more
than 30%.
* CO2 is a known greehouse gas (GHG).
* Ice core data tells us that the rise in temperatures is faster than at any
time in the last 600,000 years.
* Ice core data tells us that the rise in CO2 levels is faster than at any
time in the last 600,000 years.
* Ice core data tells us that CO2 levels and temperatures are closely
linked. Sometimes CO2 leads temperature rise and sometimes it lags.

The real concern is that we *may* be approaching a 'tipping point', beyond
which there is nothing humans can do to stave off disaster. Most scientists
feel that this level is around 500ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere. A handful of
scientists believe it is already too late. Either way, we need to address
the issue right now. There is deep concern that the release of methane from
permafrost areas will cause global warming to become unmanageable. Methane
is a more powerful GHG than CO2.



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au