What a disgusting mindset.
They were not, are not concerned at all about people, property or life, only protecting their power, their money, their reactors.
“The global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it… has corrupted so many scientists”
– Harold Lewis
Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board
I find myself incapable of believing that it is "the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud" as he says. But he certainly acted on his belief in the matter. It's hard to ignore something like this, though I note some have no problem ignoring it completely. If you add in the supposed vast conspiracy and money flowing from "the other side", some sort of fossil fuel Cabal acting to "destroy science", then we have a vast global fight going on between two sides, centered around money, power and fuels.
With the fate of the world hanging in the balance. Fascinating actually.
Old reheated baloney.
Fortune favors those who wait for the reality to be revealed.
Just like on countless message boards, the nuclear cheerleader was hard at work before anything was really known about the disaster, trying hard to protect not people, not the planet, but their beloved reactors. This shameless bullshit rhetoric, the lack of any human empathy or even reason, it’s fascinating when the blind eye and bias becomes so apparent so easily.
So, have we lost several states yet? How many have died so far in the US from the imminent nuclear disaster? I haven’t seen much in the news about it, but obviously the MSM is blocking all reports.
How many have died at this point in Fukushima due to the lethal levels of radiation? Thousands? 10’s of thousands? Millions? Billions? Trillions?
It’s off the scale that you would talk about ‘shameless bullshit rhetoric’…I actually have to unhook my irony meter whenever I wander back into any thread you participate in…
-XT
They have extended the evacuation zone due to cesium counts being far over safe levels outside the previous zone. But that is just scaremongering. All is well.
If you need millions of deaths to prove nuke is unsafe, you win. The effects of radiation take years to show. Therefore the cancers will be attributed to some other cause.
The answer to the question, gonzo, is ‘zero’. NO ONE had died at Fukushima due to radiation poisoning. 10’s of thousands have died from the fucking disaster that caused Fukushima.
As for future deaths, I’m sure there will be some. Perhaps a handful from the workers, maybe a few more from the civilians. While 10’s of thousands died from the fucking earthquake and tsunami, and thousands die each year due to coal pollution.
-XT
But, nookular has radiation. Radiation is baaad, m’kay?
And farmland unusable. Cows and other farm animals getting taken off the market. Vegetables grown within 50 miles no longer fit for consumption. people not allowed near their homes in an area that keeps growing. Yep XT all is well. How can anyone be upset at poisoning a huge farmland. I did not even mention the seas being polluted with radiation.
No problems.
No one said there were no problems.
Reality reports that several old reactors, built right on a river, downstream from large reservoirs that have earthen dams, are flooded. Will flood if the river rises. Reason dictates that they are at risk of failure if any of several dams fail. While the problems are obvious, the nuclear cheerleader won’t deal with it. Instead we hear
Faced with the logical and reasonable risk, rather than look for solutions, or even discuss the issue, the nuclear cheerleader says
While it’s fun to mock the conspiracy theorists and alarmists, the cheerleader avoids the fundamental safety issues, focusing rather on
This of course is exactly the sort of response that the nuclear cheerleader hates when other people do it. That they can’t see the irony, it’s loltastic.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
And farmland unusable. Cows and other farm animals getting taken off the market. Vegetables grown within 50 miles no longer fit for consumption.
[/QUOTE]
This is of course what is commonly referred to as ‘exaggeration’.
‘All is well’ is YOUR ridiculous strawman you buffoon…I never said anything of the kind. What I SAID was ‘how many have died’. You respond with hyperbole and exaggeration and then with strawmen. Wonder why? Perhaps because, well, no one has died despite the frantic hand-wringing and words of doom and gloom from you and your kind?
How can anyone be upset by the tens of thousands that died in the earthquake and tsunami that caused this disaster? How can they be upset by the villages that were wiped off the map and the hundreds of billions of yen this has cost the Japanese?
The trouble with saying this is that everyone is aware you are pulling it out of your ass…just like the rest of your bullshit. Because that’s all you are gonzo…ignorance and bullshit. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries…
-XT
[QUOTE=FXMastermind]
Faced with the logical and reasonable risk, rather than look for solutions, or even discuss the issue, the nuclear cheerleader says
[/QUOTE]
So, I’ll take that as a ‘no, we haven’t lost any states despite my frantic worry-age about it earlier’.
So, ‘no’ would be the answer to the imminent nuclear disaster then. Thanks.
IOW, again the answer is ‘no’…not a conspiracy by the MSM to keep the vital news out of the public’s hands and cover for the evil nuclear energy cartel, instead there was really nothing to see there, the frantic bleating of the anti-nuclear crowd was again a false alarm. I didn’t ask, but I guess those dams didn’t collapse either, ehe? Thanks once again for the amusement of trying to handwave away your frantic and misguided fears by trying to make this about some pro-nuclear coalition you see on this board. It’s nearly as amusing as Le Jac’s dark mutterings about how we are a nest of pro-free market propagandists who are out of step with the real America and real red blooded American workers. 
-XT
You create a false standard and then deny it. Where are the pile of dead people and the states that have to become uninhabited? It is not a nuclear explosion you idiot. it is radiation poisoning. It takes time to kill. But it will, slowly and horribly. Want an unusable state? Try Chernobyl. Try Fukushima. The people are being evacuated . Why is that? Are you really too stupid to understand the meltdowns are poisoning the land for many miles and , the ocean and the air?
Some radiation takes years to show. Some is faster because it disrupts a persons DNA. But even those will not show tomorrow morning. But it will come. And by then you will claim it was from something else. The truth and you are strangers.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
You create a false standard and then deny it.
[/QUOTE]
No, I simply told you that no one is saying ‘don’t worry’ or anything of the sort.
Well…where are they? You’ve been show the statistics pointing to piles of dead from coal plants. You’ve seen the grim statistics from the tsunami and earthquake dead in Japan. Where are your statistics pointing to the vast menace of nuclear energy?? I’ve seen a few obviously bloated statistics supposedly from Chernobyl, but that’s about it.
Unless you are saying that nuclear energy is really not all that dangerous as it’s implemented, at least wrt human life (which is quite robust and able to withstand huge amounts of radiation) but it’s deadly to farms and fish…or something? See, that’s the thing…when asked to quantify the menace by showing how deadly dangerous it is you basically handwave and then do the two step shuffle.
Why not post a few random links? It will make you feel better. Then you and FXM can do some mutual anti-nuclear masturbation, stroke each other and stoke the fear, then you can come back and convince yourselves that nuclear is the greatest threat to mankind since the advent of sliced bread.
Straw…the other white-meat.
Yes…it’s taken decades to kill an estimated 4000-6000 at Chernobyl after all. I’m sure in 60 years or so a lot of folks in and around Fukushima who were living when the disaster struck and weren’t unfortunate enough to be among the 20-30,000 killed immediately will die, and within 100 years my guess is the vast majority will be dead! :eek:
No, but I suspect based on your posts and FXM’s posts that someone does/did, ehe? You guys were practically wetting the bed in hopeful anticipation of the disaster that was coming down the pike and would (in your own feeble minds) render an entire state uninhabitable.
No, you are simply too stupid to understand the point, despite the fact that numerous posters have tried to beat it through that granite lump you have between your shoulders. No one denies that radiation leaked from Fukushima or Chernobyl you moron. No one has said that. No one denied that Fukushima was a serious situation or that the emergency was real, no one denies that Chernobyl was a complete disaster that will take hundreds or thousands of years before people could live there again without danger. It always amazes me that just when I think you couldn’t possibly be any stupider than you are, you go and prove me wrong. :smack:
Again, no one denies this. The POINT, however, is that the relative risk is small compares to other risks we take every day. Possibly a few dozens, maybe a few score or even a few hundred people living in Japan will die from radiation effects years or decades from now. It won’t be thousands, or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions, however. It won’t be as many people as those who fucking died in the event that caused Fukushima.
At Chernobyl thousands have died…anywhere between 4000 and perhaps 10,000 have died so far, and I’m sure there will be more to come. It was a disaster…the worst one in history for nuclear energy. But how many 10’s of thousands of Russians have died EVERY YEAR from coal fired plants that are incredibly dirty? How many have died from chemical plants or leaks, or toxic waste?? Relative risk…I know you can’t comprehend what that means since you are too stupid and ignorant to get it through your thick skull, despite having many posters try and explain it to you or shame you into THINKING for a change instead of just jerking your knee. In a modern society there are many things that society does that will kill some non-zero number of the populace.
Just going to delete the rest of this post since there is zero point in trying to once again explain risk assessment and cost to benefits evaluations. All of the rational 'dopers already know all this stuff, and you and FXM…well, the wall would have more of a chance of comprehending the point than you would gonzo. I’ve thrown out pocket lint that had more native intelligence than you, and FXM is, well, FXM…
-XT
Meanwhile, back in the real world…
http://domesticfuel.com/2011/07/05/renewable-energy-production-surpasses-nuclear/
Before you nuclear moonbats start whining, check the source
If you lump enough things together I guess eventually you get a winner, especially since nuclear energy has been pretty static for over a decade since we aren’t building a lot of new nuclear power plants. The article you linked too is talking about energy production (this would include all energy, not just electricity which only accounts for around 40% of all US energy), and they are throwing everything including the kitchen sink into the equation to get it to equal nuclear even then, including the rise in biofuel usage. Biomass, of course, accounts for the lions share of all the ‘renewable’ energy production, with hydroelectric also being a large contributing factor. By mixing energy production types and then comparing them to a single production source (that is fairly static) and is only involved in ELECTRICAL energy production it’s easy to build your strawman and knock him down.
When you start looking at electrical energy production, or you break down what each of those ‘renewable’ energy sources account for in the mix you get a more realistic picture of what’s happening. Not that the article is trying to deceive or anything, the trouble is those such as FXM use stuff like that to then equate wind and solar as being scalable to replace nuclear and this proves it…or something.
That’s the real world. Now, back to FXM’s world…
-XT
Poor xtisme, you just can’t seem to get the ‘ranting about stupid shit’ down. I mean, you tried at least, using all caps at one point, but you just fizzle out and end on a pessimistic and boring note.
Your problem is that reality is obvious, and no matter how many times you repeat something idiotic, it won’t make it true. Much less get anyone but your fellow believers to agree with you. Because the ongoing crisis, the huge disaster that is Fukushima is simply there. And you can’t make it go away, even if you think ignoring it will make that happen.
And there you go again. Maybe you are simply confused. It’s like if almost everyone was rescued from the Titanic, so there were few deaths, you would be repeating over and over that it wasn’t really a disaster, because so few people died.
Ignoring the loss of a new ship, the horror and the cold, the loss of much irreplaceable property, all the valuables, and even while thousands were huddled in ships holds and sleeping on ice cold decks of the rescue ships, you were trying hard to convince everyone that it wasn’t that bad, that the risks of driving in a carriage were worse.
People would simply dismiss you as a crank.
Meanwhile, in the real world, solar just keeps adding carbon free electricity to mankind, free of all the risks and dangers that nuclear reactors would bring.
The nuclear moonbat would try and tell you a nuclear reactor outside Amsterdam would be safe and clean and cheap. None of which is true. Meanwhile, for less than half the cost you could use solar to create more juice. Since peak use is during the daytime, especially on hot days, solar can easily meet peak demand, now. Not maybe ten years from now when the nuclear plant might be ready.