Gary Johnson.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-06-2016, 12:26 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(09-06-2016 06:18 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 05:43 PM)Colourcraze Wrote:  Jill Stein's my first choice, but this Johnson guy seems fairly decent.

You know he's a pothead, right?

I didn't.... but I'm not repulsed. Am I supposed to be?

Especially given the other options...

Atheism is the only way to truly be free from sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 12:33 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(09-06-2016 05:43 PM)Colourcraze Wrote:  Jill Stein's my first choice, but this Johnson guy seems fairly decent.
If you don't mind me asking, what do you think about Jill Stein's views on vaccines, homeopathy and nuclear energy?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 12:41 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(10-06-2016 12:33 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 05:43 PM)Colourcraze Wrote:  Jill Stein's my first choice, but this Johnson guy seems fairly decent.
If you don't mind me asking, what do you think about Jill Stein's views on vaccines, homeopathy and nuclear energy?

Out of those three, I'm only aware of her view on nuclear energy, which is to minimize it, just like other non-renewable energy sources.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about nuclear energy. While atmospherically it's definitely less of a pollutant than fossil fuels, the waste after the fact is a big issue, as is the water needed to cool the reactors. Nuclear plants raise the temperature significantly of the river/lake/area they take water from, affecting the plants and animals that live there. I don't know. I don't hold any hard opposition to it, but I'd rather see investment in improving renewables.

and now to find out about this homeopathy thing....

Atheism is the only way to truly be free from sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 01:14 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(10-06-2016 12:41 AM)Colourcraze Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 12:33 AM)Vosur Wrote:  If you don't mind me asking, what do you think about Jill Stein's views on vaccines, homeopathy and nuclear energy?

Out of those three, I'm only aware of her view on nuclear energy, which is to minimize it, just like other non-renewable energy sources.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about nuclear energy. While atmospherically it's definitely less of a pollutant than fossil fuels, the waste after the fact is a big issue, as is the water needed to cool the reactors. Nuclear plants raise the temperature significantly of the river/lake/area they take water from, affecting the plants and animals that live there. I don't know. I don't hold any hard opposition to it, but I'd rather see investment in improving renewables.

and now to find out about this homeopathy thing....
Those are perfectly valid concerns. The good news, however, is that scientists are hard at work at developing so-called molten salt reactors that could use spent fuel from older reactors to generate more energy. It doesn't eliminate the problem of nuclear waste entirely, but this process reduces the half-life of the materials in question so drastically that we would only have to store them safely for a few hundred years instead of several ten thousand years. It's absolutely mind-boggling how much energy a nuclear power plant puts out, by the way. The competition doesn't even come close. It's just such a marvelous and ingenious use of science. Sorry, technology is my big passion and this one really excites me. Laugh out load

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
10-06-2016, 03:04 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
Nuclear energy is bad.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 03:58 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(10-06-2016 03:04 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Nuclear energy is bad.

So is trolling you Kiwi bastard Angry

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
10-06-2016, 06:18 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
I'm serious. The risks are too high in relation to the consequences. And not just in relation to the nuclear power planet itself but all stages of dealing with radioactive material.
Human error, machine failure, terrorism, natural disasters (look what happened in Japan).

I'm not saying the oil or coal is any better. I get that the pollution those plants emit are causing huge issues. But you're replacing fire with a live grenade.

We need to develop renewable energy sources and we need to be smarter about how we do it. ie: legislating that all new houses built be installed with solar panels.
And offer grants and incentives for people to install solar panels on their homes. But also not just solar panels, but things like insulation and double glazing to keep houses warmer reducing the need for electricity. Also has the added bonus of keeping people healthier, especially children. Especially poor children who are more likely to develop breathing conditions such as asthma because they're more likely to live in cold damp houses.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 06:36 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(10-06-2016 06:18 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  I'm serious. The risks are too high in relation to the consequences. And not just in relation to the nuclear power planet itself but all stages of dealing with radioactive material.
Human error, machine failure, terrorism, natural disasters (look what happened in Japan).

I'm not saying the oil or coal is any better. I get that the pollution those plants emit are causing huge issues. But you're replacing fire with a live grenade.

We need to develop renewable energy sources and we need to be smarter about how we do it. ie: legislating that all new houses built be installed with solar panels.
And offer grants and incentives for people to install solar panels on their homes. But also not just solar panels, but things like insulation and double glazing to keep houses warmer reducing the need for electricity. Also has the added bonus of keeping people healthier, especially children. Especially poor children who are more likely to develop breathing conditions such as asthma because they're more likely to live in cold damp houses.

Then why aren't you all jumping up for the Green Party folks for the US. That's their overpromoted fear and backlash to the argument too. Like Jill Stein or Bob Barr

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 06:43 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
(10-06-2016 06:18 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  I'm serious. The risks are too high in relation to the consequences. And not just in relation to the nuclear power planet itself but all stages of dealing with radioactive material.
Human error, machine failure, terrorism, natural disasters (look what happened in Japan).

I'm not saying the oil or coal is any better. I get that the pollution those plants emit are causing huge issues. But you're replacing fire with a live grenade.

We need to develop renewable energy sources and we need to be smarter about how we do it. ie: legislating that all new houses built be installed with solar panels.
And offer grants and incentives for people to install solar panels on their homes. But also not just solar panels, but things like insulation and double glazing to keep houses warmer reducing the need for electricity. Also has the added bonus of keeping people healthier, especially children. Especially poor children who are more likely to develop breathing conditions such as asthma because they're more likely to live in cold damp houses.

Do you know what grand sum energy production is????

....

Any means of energy production (not creation) has a grand sum - the amount of energy it's likely to convert in it's lifetime- versus the energy needed to produce the item.

Solar panels list on the very low end. That is -- the kilowatts of energy to build them, is close to the energy they put out over their service life.

Wind power turbines are better -- hydro/electric or tidal pool capture are probably the best - of "renewables".

Solar panels are really only an option in limited applications -- where it's more cost effective than running commercial power into a remote area, for instance.

They only LOOK cost effective elsewhere - because of government subsidies offsetting the PRICE..... The energy it took to make them, doesn't change however.... Somewhere, they're burning coal, oil, or natural gas to manufacture those panels.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like onlinebiker's post
10-06-2016, 06:54 AM
RE: Gary Johnson.
Forget the risks. Let's just splurge while we have the option, then when shit hits the fan fight for the leftovers. I'm tired of trying to micromanage the planet. Nobody follows the rules we spend trillions trying to implement and those that do lack the will to enforce them.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: