Environment & Energy

OKIsItJustMe

(21,875 posts)

61. So, let me see if I follow your argument

Mon Jul 1, 2013, 06:15 PM

Jul 2013

Chernobyl wasn’t a problem, because it continued operating (mostly) as usual:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112748027#post2

Thousands of cases of childhood thyroid cancer from Chernobyl don’t matter, because there were only 9 documented deaths:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112748027#post24

Hundreds of documented deaths of emergency workers don’t matter, because… well… just because… um… there may be undocumented wind turbine deaths:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112748027#post50

Chernobyl is irrelevant because it has been shut down.

And there are no more RBMK plants in use. (Right?)
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Leningrad_1_decision_before_year_end-1103137.html

And there have been no other nuclear accidents since then. (Right?)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is solar really four times the cost of nuclear? No, but� [View all] wtmusic Jun 2013 OP

people of chernobyl are anxiously awaiting the arrival of "cheap, low cost" nuclear nt msongs Jun 2013 #1

They didn't have to wait at all. wtmusic Jun 2013 #2

Gee, nuclear power for the hospitals Lugal Zaggesi Jun 2013 #4

Oh please...you and Helen Caldicott wtmusic Jun 2013 #6

Oh please...you and Glenn Beck Lugal Zaggesi Jun 2013 #7

Check this out - this dude grew up across the street from the reactor wtmusic Jun 2013 #8

He looks deformed, BlueToTheBone Jul 2013 #26

Kiev, Ukraine, 20 April 2011 - Secretary-General's remarks at "25 Years after Chernobyl Catastrophe: OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #23

Thyroid cancer from Chernobyl has conclusively resulted in nine (9) deaths. wtmusic Jul 2013 #24

Let�s not pretend it was business as usual after the meltdown OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #25

Backpedal! Backpedal! wtmusic Jul 2013 #29

I�m not backpedalling in the least OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #33

Still waiting. nt wtmusic Jul 2013 #38

What are you waiting for? OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #44

Nuclear is cleaner than renewables wtmusic Jul 2013 #46

And, if battery backup, or hydrogen backup were used? OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #51

Honestly I don't know. wtmusic Jul 2013 #54

Do you own stock? BlueToTheBone Jul 2013 #27

When antinukes don't have an argument, they resort to mindless hacks. wtmusic Jul 2013 #31

One last question. BlueToTheBone Jul 2013 #37

World Nuclear Association: Health Impacts � Chernobyl Accident Appendix 2 OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #28

Hilarious...you might want to "read" before you "cut and paste". wtmusic Jul 2013 #36

And there it is! Your tell! The smiley! OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #48

How many people have died from wind turbines falling over? wtmusic Jul 2013 #50

You like to pretend that nuclear power is absolutely safe OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #52

Really? Show me where I make that claim. nt wtmusic Jul 2013 #53

It�s all about your attitude OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #55

If they had depended on solar panels covered with snow to keep them warm wtmusic Jul 2013 #56

Non sequitur - I thought the topic was the safety of nuclear fission plants OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #57

And we should consider the design of Chernobyl as representative? wtmusic Jul 2013 #58

I suppose we should consider Chernobyl irrelevant� OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #59

For all practical purposes, it is. wtmusic Jul 2013 #60

So, let me see if I follow your argument OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #61

You and your straw men: please talk amongst yourselves. I'm bored. wtmusic Jul 2013 #63

I don�t need any straw men to keep me company OKIsItJustMe Jul 2013 #64

A couple of extra pair of underwear... kristopher Jul 2013 #65

People in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan Lugal Zaggesi Jun 2013 #3

Sorry - but you are being a sucker for anti-nukes that know Photoshop... PamW Jun 2013 #10

Chernobyl is the Hindenburg of the nuclear power industry PamW Jun 2013 #9

Whats illogical in all this madokie Jun 2013 #11

Post removed Post removed Jun 2013 #13

Nuclear the cheapest option? Only if you lie. kristopher Jun 2013 #5

Just wondering... Did you actually believe any of that? FBaggins Jun 2013 #12

Sorry but that doesn't work. kristopher Jun 2013 #14

Nice attempt at deflection FBaggins Jun 2013 #15

It is manifestly obvious that wind is cheaper than nuclear. DLnyc Jun 2013 #16

You need to do some homework. wtmusic Jun 2013 #17

Well thank you for this information reinforcing my point. DLnyc Jun 2013 #18

Please. $50 billion in "nuclear subsidies" is either just bullshit wtmusic Jul 2013 #19

Back of napkin, early morning half assed asleep figures madokie Jul 2013 #20

A = pi r^2. You are basically correct. DLnyc Jul 2013 #21

And if more than half of the circle isn't over land? FBaggins Jul 2013 #22

Does that include the cost of transporting/storing spent rods? Auggie Jul 2013 #30

Soil contamination?! wtmusic Jul 2013 #32

Potential ... Auggie Jul 2013 #34

Can you guarantee the human race won't be extinct in 500 years? wtmusic Jul 2013 #35

Nuclear never cheaper once total life cycle including waste & decommission included on point Jul 2013 #39

The biggest uncertainty facing nuclear power is how many idiots Greenpeace can marshal wtmusic Jul 2013 #40

Really? Mopar151 Jul 2013 #41

All the disasters you name were from weapons production, wtmusic Jul 2013 #42

Show me the NPV for 100,000 yrs of waste protection and we can talk on point Jul 2013 #43

Ah, Greenpeace Idiotic Talking Point #1. wtmusic Jul 2013 #45

Nobody is falling for your pro nuclear propaganda. Plz move to Fukushima ok? on point Jul 2013 #47

Statistically it would be safer than living in parts of West Virginia wtmusic Jul 2013 #49

The Mass Yankee core is buried at Hanford Mopar151 Jul 2013 #62