![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You have to admit, you had that one coming, from the moment you hit "send."
;-) Nope. From the moment I hit "reply". ![]() Actually, some particle accelerators used hamsters to clean the tunnels. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jose wrote:
You have to admit, you had that one coming, from the moment you hit "send." ;-) Nope. From the moment I hit "reply". ![]() Actually, some particle accelerators used hamsters to clean the tunnels. Jose Huh? Particle accelerator tunnels are a little too large for hamsters to clean. I must have missed something. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Morgans" wrote in message ... "Jose" wrote Do you really think that terrorists who plan ten years ahead won't have moles in the reactors? Nah, moles in the reactors will not do any good. They are just small rodents. Anyway, moles in reactors would be quickly killed from all of the radiation. g No... They'd mutate into Molezilla |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote No... They'd mutate into Molezilla Well, Superman had a problem overcoming Kryptonyte, so I wonder if Molezilla has a problem with Grubenyte? g -- Jim in NC |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No... They'd mutate into Molezilla
At first I read that as "Molezerilla", but that would be pretty cheezy. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 02:04:03 GMT, Jose
wrote: Besides the repulsive words that follow Awh, gee, I'm not ****in' politically correct... That just breaks my ****in' heart... don't you think that a country that can't educate itself, that still believes in gods and spirits, that rejects evolution, and that believes taking shoes off and banning toothpaste and fine wines on carry-on luggage keeps us safe, is not really the right country to entrust bunches of nuclear reactors to? Hmmm... The way you describe it, it must really suck to live up there in Connecticut... I can understand it though -- It must suck having to live around so many Damn Yankees... Do you really think that terrorists who plan ten years ahead won't have moles in the reactors? The simple solutions aren't. And sometimes the complicated solutions aren't needed... There's probably two ways to solve this problem... One is to just nuke the whole ****in' Middle East... The other is to make their product virtually worthless... As enticing as the first method might be, I would prefer the second so that they have longer to contemplate how they screwed up... Hell, we can always go back to the first way... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Grumman-581 wrote:
And sometimes the complicated solutions aren't needed... There's probably two ways to solve this problem... One is to just nuke the whole ****in' Middle East... The other is to make their product virtually worthless... As enticing as the first method might be, I would prefer the second so that they have longer to contemplate how they screwed up... Hell, we can always go back to the first way... Their product will never be worthless. Its energy potential as a fuel not whithstanding, it will always been needed and desired as a product for lubricants, plastics, medicines, a zillion differnt chemicals and lots of other stuff. Petroleum is also the most efficient way to power an engine for aircraft for a number of reasons.... and especially small aircraft because of their size and weight limitations. Hydrogen/nuclear/solar/whatever powered aircraft may one day be a reality... but long after these other technologies have been successfully used in automobiles - why are by far the largest mass consumers of petro fuels on the planet. In fact, once petroleum is replaced in vehicles the proce of fuel JET ot AVGAS will go down accordingly. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Grumman-581 wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:40:25 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote: Perhaps 23,437.5 square miles, or an area 153 miles on a side, is easier to visualize. :-) In other words, a medium sized Texas ranch... Or to be more to the point, about 1/10th the size of all of little ol' Texas itself. Obviously there aren't any ranches in Texas anything near that size. The 1002 Area of ANWR absolutely dwarfs the largest ranch in Texas. It dwarfs at least the two largest ranches *combined*. I didn't try to see, but it is possible that all ranches in Texas put together might actually equal the size of the 1002 Area in ANWR... Somewhat larger than a few states. About the size of West Virginia, and larger than 9 states to be specific. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 03:55 AM |
NTSB: USAF included? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 10 | September 11th 05 10:33 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | April 5th 04 03:04 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |