XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, sci.skeptic, alt.global-warming   
   From: user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   On 12/22/25 7:28 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   > On 12/22/25 3:06 PM, Samuel Spade wrote:   
   >> Wilson  wrote:   
   >>> On 12/20/2025 10:59 PM, Samuel Spade wrote:   
   >>>> Wilson  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> After the USSR folded, they declassified a ton of documents. Some of   
   >>>>> which included their operation to gin up sentiment by paying groups to   
   >>>>> oppose nuclear power. The obvious goal was to slow down or stop new   
   >>>>> plants being built.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Chernobyl showed a lot of americans & others, that nuclear power is   
   >>>> troublesome.  A lot more convincing than propaganda, wasn't it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Are you claiming the russians staged that all for our benefit?   
   >>>   
   >>> You should look into what actually happened there and why. The   
   >>> "accident" had more to do with the systemic failures within the Soviet   
   >>> Union than nuclear power.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> The Chernobyl meltdown was a series of human blunders.  The area around   
   >> it may be unusable for thousands of years.  Amazingly enough, something   
   >> similar will probably happen again.   
   >>   
   >> OTOH, the shelling of Chernobyl (and ukraine's other nuke plant) and the   
   >> takeover of the plant by the russian army from the ukrainian engineers   
   >> was not by mistake.  Nuclear plants and waste dumps are an engraved   
   >> invitation for beligerants and terrorists to make mischief.   
   >>   
   >> And then there are the waste storage sites which will be radioactive for   
   >> hundreds of thousands of years.  They will be looted as surely as most   
   >> of the pharoahs' burial sites were.   
   >>   
   >> I used to be all in favor of nuclear power before Russia attacked   
   >> Chernobyl.  Humans can't be trusted to not vandalize the planet.   
   >   
   > yeah well if we didn't just trash can nuclear research, we wouldn't be   
   > stuck with 1970s nuclear tech and could have developed forms with far   
   > greater safety   
      
   hot fusion is honestly a pipe dream still, that's fine.   
      
   we really need something to hold us over until it's not.   
      
   and i think advanced fission, produced in a globally cooperative manner,   
   would be transformative. would give me a lot of hope into avoiding   
   climate change shit show without massively impacting life as we know it.   
      
   without that, idk about that really. it's gunna be a shit show and a   
   growing number of factions have access to nuclear weapons.   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Also look into the US Navy's Nuclear program. It's been in operation   
   >>> since 1953. Over 177 million miles safely steamed on nuclear power and   
   >>> thousands of reactor-years of operation. And no reactor accidents   
   >>> resulting in radiation release, personnel harm from radiation, or   
   >>> environmental contamination.   
   >>   
   >> Also look into the Russian/soviet navy's nuclear program.  At least 1   
   >> submarine sunk, and who knows what else.   
   >>   
   >> So nuclear is safe, but solar, windmills, hydro, geothermal, and tidal   
   >> generation are killing people right and left, right?   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   a burnt out swe investigating into why our tooling doesn't involve   
   basic semantic proofs like halting analysis   
      
   please excuse my pseudo-pyscript,   
      
   ~ nick   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)