3 ms·
That wasn't your statement. It's real weird how any pro nuclear argument always seems to be followed up by this exact same slimy deflection tactic and a never e
by Schroedingersat 4y ago
That wasn't your statement. It's real weird how any pro nuclear argument always seems to be followed up by this exact same slimy deflection tactic and a never ending stream of lies.
- illiarian 4y agoThis is my statement: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35383560 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35383560 This applies to the whole fearmongering about nuclear energy with actual slimy tactics.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoImplying that the evacuation was unnecessary. Either you have no idea what short lived fission prpducts are or you're actively lying.
- illiarian 4y ago> Implying that the evacuation was unnecessary. Implying that overall dangers spouted by fearmongers are overrated given the context of the discussion.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoAgain, the straw man you fell back to was not your initial statement.
- illiarian 4y agoAgain, whatever you imagine I implied, said, or thought, has nothing to do with what I actually said or thought.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoYou said the evacuations were unnecessary and killed people. Leaving a burning building doesn't kill people even if some die in the attempt. You then backed up immediately with unrelated nonsense when challenged.