KD in CA Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Didn't take long for the nuclear apologists to jump to the defense of this perfectly safe power source. I'm all fired up about building more of these perfectly safe reactors. Meanwhile wind power is bad! The oil companies and fo news told me so. Not to mention those ugly wind turbines six miles out in Cape Cod Bay would spoil the view from the Kennedy compound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 By now we have all read that the radiation emanating from the Japanese plants is akin to a dental x-ray. I understand that no radiation is good radiation but if the winds blow this stuff to Canada then they will simply be catching up to the developed world. 96.8% of Canadians have probably not had a dental x-ray in the past 10 years so big whoop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I'm pro nuclear power but I'm against their refusal to advance from their 1950s-1960s technology. So you're saying nukes technology has not advanced in 50-60 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 By now we have all read that the radiation emanating from the Japanese plants is akin to a dental x-ray. I understand that no radiation is good radiation but if the winds blow this stuff to Canada then they will simply be catching up to the developed world. 96.8% of Canadians have probably not had a dental x-ray in the past 10 years so big whoop. So, where do you think Frenkle falls? 96.8% or the other half? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 So, where do you think Frenkle falls? 96.8% or the other half? Well he is bald which could be from poorly aimed dental x-rays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Well he is bald which could be from poorly aimed dental x-rays. You know when it's tough to aim a dental x-ray? When your head's bouncing down a flight of stairs, that's when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronc24 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 By now we have all read that the radiation emanating from the Japanese plants is akin to a dental x-ray. I understand that no radiation is good radiation but if the winds blow this stuff to Canada then they will simply be catching up to the developed world. 96.8% of Canadians have probably not had a dental x-ray in the past 10 years so big whoop. I'll take it...better than the 100% below the Mason-Dixon line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I'll take it...better than the 100% below the Mason-Dixon line. Of course it's 100% down south. X-ray machines in Canada don't have nearly that kind of range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Of course it's 100% down south. X-ray machines in Canada don't have nearly that kind of range. Plus they don't last as long as most of the lens caps are stolen and used as pucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yes, the most catastrophic earthquake in Japan's recorded history, not to mention the resulting tsunami, should be the be the benchmark for determining the relative safety of nuclear power plants. Wind power is great, but not enough. Nuclear is one of the most efficient and least polluting sources of energy we currently have and has a great record as far as safety goes. I guess I was wrong when I said the far left isn't as anti-nuclear power as it used to be. Sounds like you've been waiting for this ever since the Chernobyl meltdown. When I first read this I thought you almost sounded reasonable, but after looking into exactly what happened I have to ask you if you are insane? We don't even know where this is going yet, now we know they have been using weapons grade plutonium and that those cells might have already melted down? And don't forget--or just know--the earthquake didn't hit the plant, it just cut its power off, and the generators only had eight hours of back up. And as a matter of fact the worst earthquake and Tusmni are good benchmarks for this because we have to be prepared for things like this happening. Should we aim even lower? What if its a friggin terror attack? That could never happen!! I'm no "anti-nuke" environmentalist, I'm just seeing this for what it is, a real f-up. You pro nuclear at any cost nut jobs are wacked. And I love your comment about how clean nuclear is. Can we store the spent fuel in your basement? By now we have all read that the radiation emanating from the Japanese plants is akin to a dental x-ray. I understand that no radiation is good radiation but if the winds blow this stuff to Canada then they will simply be catching up to the developed world. 96.8% of Canadians have probably not had a dental x-ray in the past 10 years so big whoop. Is that what Fox is reporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 When I first read this I thought you almost sounded reasonable, but after looking into exactly what happened I have to ask you if you are insane? We don't even know where this is going yet, now we know they have been using weapons grade plutonium and that those cells might have already melted down? And don't forget--or just know--the earthquake didn't hit the plant, it just cut its power off, and the generators only had eight hours of back up. And as a matter of fact the worst earthquake and Tusmni are good benchmarks for this because we have to be prepared for things like this happening. Should we aim even lower? What if its a friggin terror attack? That could never happen!! I'm no "anti-nuke" environmentalist, I'm just seeing this for what it is, a real f-up. You pro nuclear at any cost nut jobs are wacked. And I love your comment about how clean nuclear is. Can we store the spent fuel in your basement? Is that what Fox is reporting? Full disclosure on Fox below. http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/megan-fox-video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 When I first read this I thought you almost sounded reasonable, but after looking into exactly what happened I have to ask you if you are insane? We don't even know where this is going yet, now we know they have been using weapons grade plutonium and that those cells might have already melted down? And don't forget--or just know--the earthquake didn't hit the plant, it just cut its power off, and the generators only had eight hours of back up. And as a matter of fact the worst earthquake and Tusmni are good benchmarks for this because we have to be prepared for things like this happening. Should we aim even lower? What if its a friggin terror attack? That could never happen!! I'm no "anti-nuke" environmentalist, I'm just seeing this for what it is, a real f-up. You pro nuclear at any cost nut jobs are wacked. And I love your comment about how clean nuclear is. Can we store the spent fuel in your basement? "Weapons-grade plutonium". "Earthquake didn't hit the plant." !@#$ing priceless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Is that what Fox is reporting? I don't know. It doesn't matter to me whether it is Fox, CNN, ABC or whatever reporting. When there is a story about Canadians I just turn the channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 "Weapons-grade plutonium". "Earthquake didn't hit the plant." !@#$ing priceless. Could he be dumber than conner? Serious competition here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I don't know. It doesn't matter to me whether it is Fox, CNN, ABC or whatever reporting. When there is a story about Canadians I just turn the channel. What about fooochin HNIC, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Could he be dumber than conner? Serious competition here. No. Dave knows he's an idiot, and relies on bluster and "think of the children" arguments to cover it up. Conner honestly thought he was an intellectual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Could he be dumber than conner? Serious competition here. You tell me. That's his picture below. http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/1058327/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 You tell me. That's his picture below. http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/1058327/ Bastard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Bastard C'mon now, my mother would be insulted and my father royally pissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronc24 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Plus they don't last as long as most of the lens caps are stolen and used as pucks. They hurt like hell when frozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts