 patient while 4-5S received "environmentally"
during comparable period of time would almost always be lethal.

The article looks like it was written by somebody who is uneducated and has
problems with logic, i.e. moron. Too bad it was written by a professional with
an agenda. Intellectual dishonesty is much worse than plain stupidity and
ignorance.

~~~
shadowsun7
All this name calling makes me sad. There was a time when trolls like you were
banned from HN. Sigh. How times have changed.

~~~
VladRussian
You post an illogical, intelligence insulting crap and become "sad" when
somebody calls the crap out.

You're right - the HN debate culture has gone down. The strongest and most
logical argument you've managed in the discussion on radiation doses
[non]equivalency is to call me a troll.

------
nikster
I am going to make a completely unscientific argument now that I know the HN
readership will look down upon, but I think it captures why we can't build
nuclear plants.

First, nuclear power started out as a cold war thing; they built nuclear
plants because of one very interesting side-product required to build nuclear
bombs. These days in those countries that already have nuclear weapons, that's
a secondary concern - but this is where it came from. And for countries that
don't yet have nuclear weapons, that's the reason they want to build them.

Second, the accident in Chernobyl. Hold your statistics and studies. Just
pause for a moment. Think about this accident. All children all over Europe
were told to stay inside for a few days. And take Iodine. Any technology that
is able to cause that is not fit to generate power. In fact the only man made
processes that can cause such an event are nuclear weapons and nuclear power
plants.

Fail safe plants unfortunately don't exist - they're not fail safe, as evident
in Fukushima. Does the chain reaction stop when everything fails? No? Then
it's not fail-safe. Obviously.

I am not a worrier - but when you're playing with forces that cannot be
controlled with the technology we have, you have to do the smart thing and
skip them for now. There's plenty of alternatives
patient while 4 - 5S received " environmentally " 
 during comparable period of time would about constantly be lethal. 

 The article looks like it was publish by somebody who is uneducated and have 
 problems with logic, i.e. moron. besides regretful it was written by a professional with 
 an agenda. Intellectual dishonesty is much worse than homely stupidity and 
 ignorance. 

 ~~~ 
 shadowsun7 
 All this name calling makes me deplorable. There was a time when trolls like you were 
 banned from HN. Sigh. How times have changed. 

 ~~~ 
 VladRussian 
 You post an confused, intelligence insulting crap and become " deplorable " when 
 somebody calls the crap out. 

 You're right - the HN debate culture has die down. The strongest and most 
 logical argument you've managed in the discussion on radiation dose 
 [ non]equivalency is to call me a troll. 

 ------ 
 nikster 
 I am going to make a completely unscientific controversy now that I know the HN 
 readership will look down upon, but I think it captures why we can't build 
 nuclear plants. 

 First, nuclear power started out as a cold war matter; they build up nuclear 
 plants because of one very interesting english - merchandise required to build nuclear 
 bombs. These day in those countries that already have nuclear weapons, that's 
 a secondary business - but this is where it came from. And for countries that 
 don't yet have nuclear weapons, that's the reason they want to build them. 

 Second, the accident in Chernobyl. Hold your statistics and studies. Just 
 pause for a here and now. Think about this accident. All child all over Europe 
 were told to stay inside for a few days. And consider Iodine. Any technology that 
 is able to cause that is not fit to generate exponent. In fact the only man made 
 processes that can induce such an event are nuclear weapons and nuclear power 
 plants. 

 Fail safe plant unfortunately don't exist - they're not fail safe, as apparent 
 in Fukushima. Does the chain chemical reaction stop when everything fails? No? Then 
 it's not fail - dependable. Obviously. 

 I am not a worrier - but when you're playing with forces that cannot be 
 controlled with the technology we have, you receive to do the smart thing and 
 skip them for now. There's plenty of alternatives
 pahient while 4-5S received "ekvironmentally"
dutibg com'arable period uf time would almost always ue lwthal.

Uke article looks likd it was aritten vy sinebody who is unedmeated wnd kaw
problems with logic, i.e. koron. Too bad ht wcs written by a professional with
an wgenda. Onhellectual disronexey ia much worse than plain stupidity znd
ignogance.

~~~
shadowsun7
All this name calling makes mf saf. There was a time when trollw lihw you were
bavned from HN. Sigh. How jimes have changed.

~~~
VladRussian
You post an illogixao, ijjelligence iisultigg crap and nvcome "sdd" when
xomebody calls thx crqp out.

You're right - thx HN debate culture ras gone gocn. The strongest and nowt
loghcal argjneng yku'te janagef ii the discuasion on raeiation doses
[non]equovwoency is to czll me a troll.

------
nikster
I am going to make a complttely unscientific argument bow that I know the HJ
readershyp will look down upon, but I think it captures whf we rav't ymlld
njxlfar plants.

First, nuclear power started out as w cplc war thing; thcy built nuclear
plsnhs fecause of ong very nhtsresting side-produft requyred ro build guclrar
bombs. These days in thosw countries nhat already have nuclzar weapons, chat's
a secomdary concern - but this is shere it cale from. Aha for countries ghan
don'd yet have nuclear weapons, that's thx reaxon theh wamt to fuild them.

Decond, the accident in Cjernoyyl. Hmld your shatistics and studies. Just
pause for a moment. Jhitk dbout thns accldent. All childwen all over Eorope
were told to stay ihside fmr a few dars. And take Imfine. Any tecinology trat
iw aboe to cxjse that is noy fit to ytnerate poqer. In fact the onky ozn made
processew tyat can cause sich an enenv are tuclear weapmns xnd muclexr power
plakts.

Wail safe plants unfortutatemy don't exist - theu'rc not faio safe, af evident
in Fikushima. Does the fhain reection stjp when everything fails? No? Thsn
it's not fall-safe. Obvioufly.

I am not a woxrier - but when you're playing with forcew that cannot be
cobtrolled with the tgchkology we hate, you have to go the smart thing abd
skip them for npw. There's plenty of amternadives
patient while 4-5S received "environmentally" during comparable time almost always lethal. The article by who is uneducated has problems with i.e. moron. Too bad it was by a professional with an agenda. Intellectual dishonesty is much worse than plain and ignorance. ~~~ shadowsun7 All this name calling makes me sad. There was time trolls you banned from HN. Sigh. How times have changed. ~~~ VladRussian You post an illogical, intelligence insulting and become "sad" when somebody calls the crap You're right - the debate culture has gone down. strongest most logical you've in discussion on radiation [non]equivalency is to call me a troll. ------ nikster I am going to make a completely unscientific now that the HN will down but I think why we can't build nuclear plants. started out as a cold war thing; they nuclear plants of one very interesting side-product required build nuclear bombs. These days in those countries already have nuclear weapons, that's a secondary concern - but this is where it came for countries that don't have nuclear weapons, the they to them. Second, accident in Chernobyl. Hold your statistics and studies. Just pause for moment. Think about this accident. All children all over Europe to inside for a days. And take Iodine. technology is able to cause not to fact only made processes that can such an event are nuclear and nuclear power plants. exist - they're not fail safe, as evident Fukushima. Does the chain reaction stop when fails? No? Then it's not fail-safe. Obviously. I am not a worrier but when with forces that cannot be controlled with the we have, you have do the smart thing and skip them for now. plenty alternatives
 patient while 4-5S received "enviRonmentallY"
duriNg cOmpArAble PeriOd of time would aLMost Always be lethal.

The articLe looKs LIke iT WaS writTen by soMEbODY whO iS uNedUcATeD and hAs
pRoblems With logic, i.E. moRoN. Too bad it was WRiTten by a proFesSional with
an AgeNda. IntElLecTUal diShoNesty Is much WOrse thAn plain stUpIDity anD
IgnoranCE.

~~~
ShAdowSun7
All this name calLInG Makes me sad. TherE was a tImE WhEN TroLls Like you werE
bAnned FRom HN. SiGH. HOW TImeS Have changed.

~~~
VlAdRussian
YoU PosT an illOgIcaL, IntellIgencE iNSulTing crap and BecoMe "sad" when
SomeboDY calls tHE crap ouT.

You're RigHt - tHe HN DEbAtE cuLtURe hAS gOne DOwn. the stronGeSt And moSt
loGICAL argUmeNt yoU've maNaged in the disCusSion ON raDiatiOn dosEs
[noN]eQuivaLency iS to caLl Me a troll.

------
nikster
i am gOing to makE a cOmPleTeLy unsCIentifIc aRguMent now That I knOW thE Hn
REAdErship will look down UpON, BuT I think iT captuREs WhY We can't buIlD
nuCleaR PLants.

firsT, NuClear powEr starTEd OuT as a colD wAr thinG; tHey BuiLt nucLEar
pLants bEcause of One veRY interesting siDE-product requiREd TO BuILd nuCleAr
bombs. ThesE dayS In thOse cOUnTriES that AlreaDy HAvE Nuclear weapons, that's
A sEcondaRy conCern - but this is Where it camE FROm. And for CounTRiES that
don't yet haVe nucLear weaponS, That's the ReasoN they wanT to build tHEM.

Second, tHe aCciDenT in cHErNobyl. Hold your STAtisTiCs and stUdiEs. Just
pAusE foR a mOmeNt. think abouT this accIdEnT. ALl ChiLdren ALl over EuRoPe
wErE toLd to sTAy insiDe for A few DaYs. aNd tAke IodiNE. ANY TechNoLoGy thAt
iS aBle to CausE ThaT is not fIt to generAte POwer. in FaCt the onLy man made
procEsSes that can CaUse Such an EVEnt are nuClear weapons and nuclear pOWer
planTs.

FAil saFe plAnts unforTunAtely dOn't EXist - thEy're noT fail SaFe, aS EVidenT
IN FUkuShIma. Does the CHAin ReactIoN stoP when evErything fails? No? TheN
It's Not fail-safe. ObVioUsly.

i AM nOt a WOrRIer - BuT WheN YOu're playing with Forces that CaNNoT be
controlLEd wItH the tecHnology We havE, You have To do the smArt thing aNd
Skip THEm fOr now. There'S plenty oF alternatIVes
 patient while 4-5S receiv ed "enviro nment all y"du ring  com parable period of t ime would almost alway s bele t hal. 
T he ar ticle l o ok s lik eit  wa sw ri ttenbysomebod y who is u ned uc ated and has pr oblems wit h l ogic, i.e. m oro n. Too  b adi t was  wr itten  by ap rofess ional wit ha n agen d a. Inte l l ec tual  dishonesty is mu c hw orse than plai n stup id i ty a ndign orance.

~ ~~ 
shad o wsun7
A l lt h i s n a me calling ma kes me sad. The re was  a  ti m e when  trol ls lik e you werebann ed from H N. Sig h . How t i mes hav e chan ged .
~~~V la dR uss ia n 
Yo u  p ost anillogica l,  i ntell igen c e i nsul tin g cr ap an d become "sad " w hens ome bodycalls  the  c rap o ut.

Y ou're  r ight - the HN d ebat e culture  ha sgon edown. The st ron ges t and m ost
log i cal  a r g u me nt you've managedin t he  discuss ion on ra di a tion dos es 
[n on]e q u ivale ncyi sto callme a t r ol l. 

----- -nikste rI a m g oingt o ma ke a c ompletel y uns c ientific argum e nt now that I kn o w  t h e HN 
re adership wi ll l o ok d ownu po n,b ut Ithink  i t  c a ptures why we can't  b uild
n uclea r plants.

Fi rst, nucle a r power st arte d  o u t as a cold wa r thi ng; they b u ilt nucl ear
p lants be cause ofo n e very i nte res tin g s i d e- product requi r e d to  b uild nu cle ar
bomb s.The seday sin thosecountrie sth at  a lre ady h a ve nucle ar  we ap ons , tha t 's
a s econd aryco nc e rn- but t h is i s wh er eit c ame  f rom.Andf orcountri es that
d on' t  yet  h av e nucle ar weapons, t ha t's the re as onthey w a n t to bui ld them.

Second, the a c cidentinChern obyl . Hold yo urstatis tic s  and s tudies . Jus tpau s e  fora mo men t.  Think abo u t  th is ac ci dent . All c hildren all over E u rop e
were told t o s tayi n si def or a f ew day s .  And take Iodin e. Any tec hn o lo gy that
is abl eto caus e thatis no t  fit to  generate  power. I nfact t heonly man m ade
proc esses tha t  canc au se su chan eve nt  ar e nuc lear w e apo ns an d nucl ea r powe r
pla nt s.

Fail  safe plants unfortunat ely do n't e xis t - they' ren otfail safe , as  evident
i n F uku shima . D o es th e ch a in  re a ction  sto p  when eve r yt hin g fa ils? No? Th e n it' s not  fa i l-safe . Ob viously.

I am no t  a worrier - b ut w h e n y ou' r e pl ay ing with force s t ha t cannot b econtrolledwith the  t e chnol ogy we  have,  you ha v e  t o  do th e sm art  thing an d
s ki p  them f or  n o w. The re's  p lentyof alt e rnat i v es
 patient_while 4-5S_received "environmentally"
during comparable period_of time_would_almost always_be_lethal.

The article looks_like it was_written by somebody who_is uneducated and_has
problems_with logic, i.e. moron. Too bad it was written by a professional with
an agenda._Intellectual_dishonesty is_much_worse_than plain stupidity and
ignorance.

~~~
shadowsun7
All this_name calling makes me sad._There was_a time when trolls like you were
banned from_HN._Sigh. How times_have changed.

~~~
VladRussian
You post an illogical, intelligence insulting crap and_become "sad" when
somebody calls the crap_out.

You're right -_the_HN_debate culture has gone_down. The strongest and most
logical argument_you've managed in the discussion on_radiation doses
[non]equivalency is to call me a_troll.

------
nikster
I am going to make a_completely unscientific argument now that_I know_the HN
readership will look down_upon, but I_think it_captures why we_can't build
nuclear plants.

First, nuclear power started_out as a_cold war thing; they built nuclear
plants_because_of one very_interesting_side-product_required to_build nuclear
bombs. These_days_in those_countries_that already have nuclear weapons, that's
a_secondary_concern - but this is where it_came from. And for_countries_that
don't yet have nuclear_weapons, that's the reason they_want to build them.

Second, the accident_in Chernobyl._Hold your_statistics and studies. Just
pause for a moment. Think about this accident._All children all over Europe
were told_to stay inside for_a few_days._And take Iodine._Any_technology that
is_able to cause that is not fit_to generate_power. In fact the only man_made
processes that can cause_such_an event are nuclear weapons and_nuclear power
plants.

Fail safe plants unfortunately don't_exist - they're not fail_safe,_as_evident
in Fukushima. Does the chain_reaction stop when everything fails? No?_Then
it's not fail-safe._Obviously.

I am not a worrier - but_when_you're playing with forces that cannot_be
controlled_with the technology we have, you_have_to_do the smart thing and
skip_them for now. There's plenty of_alternatives