XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.global-warming, alt.atheism   
   From: sam@spade.invalid   
      
   dart200  wrote:   
   > On 12/23/25 9:12 AM, Samuel Spade wrote:   
      
   > > You still aren't getting it.   
   > >   
   > > It's not necessary for evildoers to "have" nukes, or nuclear material.   
   > > Maybe you didn't notice that Russia shelled Chernobyl, in the Ukraine?   
   > > With real live explosive artillery.  And that Russia shelled the   
   > > Zaporizhzhia nuclear reactor too, it wanton disregard for the potential   
   > > consequences.  It was dumb luck that no major incident happened.   
   > >   
   > > One well-placed shell could trigger a mess that makes Chernobyl look   
   > > like a cake walk.  Now, you're telling us you have a  plan to make that   
   > > impossible to happen?   
   >   
   > do u think we can survive without ending war, bro?   
      
      
   Humans have survived war since Adam, so obviously yes.   
      
      
   > and sure we could bury the reactors, that would make them arty proof   
   > unless someone specifically targets it with a bunker buster. which idk,   
   > are you worried about random bunker busters too, cause that seems a bit   
   > paradnoid. but even burying them is pretty paranoid.   
      
   How do you bury cooling towers?   
      
      
   > >>> Environmental safeguards are irrelevant when nuclear power plants are   
   > >>> being shelled.   
   > >>   
   > >> make this power plants backed by a defensive pact for all nations   
   > >> participating in the coalition. make it an act of war to mess with it.   
   > >> leaving small terrorist groups, which idk do you think we can't secure   
   > >> our sites??? build them underground, global real time monitoring ...   
   > >> like we know how to do 1st world physical security bro. we just need to   
   > >> trust the org doing it, which is why it needs to be an international   
   > >> cooperative.   
   > >   
   > > Happy talk.  Chernobyl was protected from terrorists and bad actors by   
   > > the USSR.  The USSR lasted forever, didn't it?  Now Chernobyl is in a   
   > > different country, which is being attacked by another different country.   
   > > It's in a war zone now.   
   > >   
   > > Nations come and go.  Strong governments are replaced with weak ones,   
   > > invaders, and warlords.  Pu 229 is (almost) forever.   
   >   
   > again, if we don't stick with literally 1970s tech, we can build   
   > reactors that extract energy far more effectively and don't leave almost   
   > forever waste.   
      
   Great.  Does that mean no radioactive pollution when they get blown up?   
      
   Chernobyl scattered radioactive shit all across Ukraine and Europe. That   
   was a mild case.   
      
      
   > also the catholic church lasted 2000 years. it's weird for an athiest to   
   > preach on how nothing can last, while ignoring the few orgs they   
   > consider themselves entirely above   
      
   Right, so that proves all governments can last 2000 years and guard an   
   eternal waste dump securely.  If you just chain the doors with a rosary,   
   nobody will fuck with it.   
      
      
   > i see u drank all the oil propaganda. next time drink the oil too   
      
   You're the one who was trying to convince me that renewables are too   
   dangerous and unabundant to be practical.  I never mentioned oil, and   
   it's as dirty and primitive as fission.   
      
   When all else fails, invent a conspiracy.   
      
   Now go drink your cooling water.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)