> Seems to be a ridiculous argument since nuke trains would travel near and through
> cities and towns along their way from their point of origin to Yucca Mt.

Yabut, if they are prevented from building some sort of Yucca Mountain Line, they couldn't run anywhere else on the way to it, either. And that is the whole idea. supposedly, no "nucaler" trains means no "nucaler" waste disposal, which of course means "nuculer" power plants will not be possible - right. Right!



Of course, tearing down all the dams (by the same folks) means no more hydropower. While at the same time, there apparently are to be no more coal fired power plants allowed; nor diesel fired. Even natural gas plants are being fiercely opposed everywhere. And most amazingly, so have virtually all new solar power plants in the Deserts been disallowed (again, all by the same folks).


So what's left? Maybe it's electricity itself they oppose. But since without it, this planet could not support half of the population that is on it, maybe it's the very existence of people on the planet that is really opposed.

Oh he!! - I was just trying to be facetious!

But now I remember several of my college professors did in fact suggest that the existence of people is not good for the planet, constantly interfering with the "natural way of things", as they do. One of them described people as germs, infecting the planet and making it very sick by the toxins they spew.


It ain't really so funny is it.

Too bad they have to be so extreme about it, opposing everything at every turn; rather than engaging in reasoned debate about taking better care of our home. Since opposing virtually all things industrial to the maximum extreme, absolutely makes no sense whatever, how can I not wonder if the environment really has anything at all to do with their opposition to everything. Or is there in fact, some other hidden agenda that we could make sense out of, if we just knew what it was.