Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PamW

(1,825 posts)
11. FAILED AGAIN!!!!
Thu May 3, 2012, 07:04 PM
May 2012

Once again Kris has had the opportunity to realize
the difference between burying Uranium back where
we got it, and transmuting all that Uranium into
Plutonium; as well as the differential in the time it takes
to do those two DIFFERENT tasks.

Anyone can see it doesn't take a long time to put
Uranium back where you got it; and it most
certainly doesn't take hundreds of years.

The article by Arjun that Kris references as a
rebuttal to my posts, is concerned with transmuting
all that Uranium into Plutonium. Clearly, the
process Arjun is describing is different than what
I detail in my posts.

So one wonders why Kris would offer Arjun's
article as a rebuttal; not just once, but multiple times.
Perhaps it's a "one-trick pony" problem; the Arjun
article is the only one he has on the issue, the fact
that it's totally inapt, notwithstanding.

Evidently, he doesn't WANT to understand the
difference; or he is UNABLE to understand the
difference in the two disposal methods
.

I really can't determine which of the two cases
we have here. It's moot anyway. In either case,
like always, Kris is JUST PLAIN WRONG

PamW



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Nuclear waste has to be contained for a million years bananas May 2012 #1
Good post! nt ladjf May 2012 #2
Thanks, ladjif RobertEarl May 2012 #15
Another good post. ladjf May 2012 #32
Reprocess/Recycle for short lived waste PamW May 2012 #3
THE MYTHOLOGY AND MESSY REALITY OF NUCLEAR FUEL REPROCESSING kristopher May 2012 #4
BALONEY!!! PamW May 2012 #5
I'm not going to argue with someone that has no regard for the truth kristopher May 2012 #6
FAILED UNDERSTANDING, AGAIN!!! PamW May 2012 #7
OK RobertEarl May 2012 #8
Answers... PamW May 2012 #9
Nope kristopher May 2012 #10
FAILED AGAIN!!!! PamW May 2012 #11
I know the difference between bullshit propaganda on the internet kristopher May 2012 #12
STRIKE THREE - YOU'RE OUT!!! PamW May 2012 #13
Arjun proved NOTHING!! PamW May 2012 #19
The determination that it increases waste is not made by Dr. Makhijani kristopher May 2012 #25
NOT FALSE PamW May 2012 #26
That was just two answers RobertEarl May 2012 #14
Whose fault is that? PamW May 2012 #17
You are so right RobertEarl May 2012 #18
That's for the Japanese to call... PamW May 2012 #20
That is your answer? RobertEarl May 2012 #22
WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #27
What real scientists say about reprocess/recycle: It's a "goofy idea". bananas May 2012 #16
What is the Alternative?? GreenWin May 2012 #21
Renewable energy sources are more than capable of meeting modern society's needs. kristopher May 2012 #23
WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #29
Wrong way Pam/Gregory strikes again... kristopher May 2012 #30
Accusing other people of being sockpuppets and calling other people liars XemaSab May 2012 #31
WRONG AS ALWAYS!! PamW May 2012 #33
Yes, you were. Thank you for repeating my correction of your error kristopher May 2012 #34
FOUL!!! PamW May 2012 #35
A hero!! RobertEarl May 2012 #24
BS- that it is "illegal" PamW May 2012 #28
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Future of America's Nucle...»Reply #11