CERN plans to build what the U.S. should have 23 years ago

On Friday, 18 January 2019 11:59:16 UTC-5, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
Mike Collins wrote in

nal-september.org:

wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 11:12:57 AM UTC-5, RichA
wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46862486

And the US could still build such a thing, except for all the
wasteful projects such as the "bullet train," for example:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fed...ing-for-califo
rnias-over-budget-bullet-train

It would save a few hours over driving on a trip from LA to SF
but won't go from San Diego to Phoenix. If you're in THAT much
of a hurry, you can fly, at a cost to the environment, but not
your conscience, if you are a hypocritical greenie.



Travelling by high speed train is a much more pleasant
experience than flying or driving.

Pity the US isn't capable of building any high speed trains, only
dumping billions into welfare projects for unions that will never be
completed, and nobody will ride if they are.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

You live in crappy countries the size of Texas at best, MAYBE trains make sense. But from a cost point of view, they do not and haven't since the advent of the large transport truck and jet airliner.

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and other
systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter than you (and
who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical that's the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor in the
trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and other
systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter than you (and
who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical that's the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor in the
trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

Clueless.

On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 2:39:03 PM UTC, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and other
systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter than you (and
who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical that's the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor in the
trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

Clueless.

I see the ghost of wsnell has returned to the forum unless it is some sock puppet trying to imitate him.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sci.astro.amateur/$20$20Chris$20Peterson$20stroked$20out%7Csort:date/sci.astro.amateur/P-wYICZkq6o/Wrqk6aE3AwAJ


Too many mathematicians pretending to be astronomers these days so even when the partitioning of direct/retrogrades has made it on to the radar for the first time in 500 years, this newsgroup manages to ignore it as usual.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 07:00:26 -0800 (PST), Gerald Kelleher
wrote:

I see the ghost of wsnell has returned to the forum unless it is some sock puppet trying to imitate him.

Snell died. I've seen the obit in a Georgia newspaper, and his house
got sold. This is a copycat.

On Saturday, 19 January 2019 09:39:03 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and other
systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter than you (and
who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical that's the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor in the
trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

Clueless.

Warmth saves lives, cold kills. Warmer environments increase numbers and diversity of life. The fossil record shows it, current tropical areas prove it. There is NO benefit in keeping the planet cold. The entire northern hemisphere from 35 deg up is only survivable because of human control of energy.

Chris L Peterson wrote in
:

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
Kujisalimisha wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and
other systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter than
you (and who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical
that's the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor in
the trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

Clueless.

You are, yes, but we already know that.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

RichA wrote in
:

On Saturday, 19 January 2019 09:39:03 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
Kujisalimisha wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and
other systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter
than you (and

who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical that's
the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor
in the trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global
warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

Clueless.

Warmth saves lives,

Until it, too, kills.

This is now officially a 'tard fight.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 19:35:06 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Saturday, 19 January 2019 09:39:03 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:24:33 UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:00:46 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
wrote:

We don't need to sacrifice investment in scientific
infrastructure to build carbon sequestration systems and other
systems to minimize the impact of global warming.

Only if there's enough money to do both. People smarter than you (and
who isn't, you being a Chris and all) are skeptical that's the case.

There is enough money for both, especially when you factor in the
trillions of dollars of cost incurred by global warming.

Cold killed 5 million people last year.

Clueless.

Warmth saves lives, cold kills. Warmer environments increase numbers and diversity of life. The fossil record shows it, current tropical areas prove it. There is NO benefit in keeping the planet cold. The entire northern hemisphere from 35 deg up is only survivable because of human control of energy.

In fact, nobody actually knows if more people die from warm or cold
conditions. But it is known that one consequence of global warming is
more extreme cold spells. And the deaths caused directly by heat or
cold are not really the issue, as their total will be small compared
to the millions who die in climate caused wars (a half million just in
Syria already), and from starvation, and from disease... all things
that have already begun due to climate change.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 19:35:06 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
The entire northern hemisphere from 35 deg up

Up? Not northwards?

You know, "up" is away from the Earth's surface towards space.
"Up" is not along the Earth's surface towards the north pole...