4 ms·

Ok, please explain what you mean by "results of radiation throughout generations". Or how nuclear power in France can go wrong if you didn't have either a Cher

Ok, please explain what you mean by "results of radiation throughout generations". Or how nuclear power in France can go wrong if you didn't have either a Chernobyl scenario in mind or a "tsunami hits the right bank of the Seine". If what you did wasn't a reference to Chernobyl or Fukushima then, pray tell, what was it?

Krasnol 3y ago
> Ok, please explain what you mean by "results of radiation throughout generations". https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ > Or how nuclear power in France can go wrong if you didn't have either a Chernobyl scenario in mind or I'm no nuclear scientists, but even they were unable to prevent the accidents which happened. So what's your point? Or didn't you get mine?
- mpweiher 3y ago
  > https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ LOL. Just tried a browser that goes through their illegal consent page without giving consent and it's actually worse than I had imagined. It's all about orphans in Belarus, which for some reasons becomes "the Chernobyl region". No connection to radiation or the nuclear accident whatsoever. Certainly no "results of radiation throughout generations" Oh, one claimed connection: "The effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster on the Belarusian economy prevented building and repair efforts, leaving many orphanages and Day-Care Centres poorly equipped,..." Yeah...no. Trying to verify those claims brings up articles that link back to this "charity". Nicely circular. And of course what effects there are are socio-economic effects of the evacuation and stigmatization, not "results of radiation" For example: "The widespread public image of socially and economically depressed territories with traumatized populations often prevents economic activities from developing in the affected communities." Of course the effects of the fall of the Soviet Union and the dictatorship in Belarus vastly exceed the effects even of this stigmatization. We have similar effects in Fukushima, for example the fishermen have been negatively affected. Not by radiation, because the fish are totally fine+safe, but by people not wanting to buy fish from "Fukushima", because of their irrational fears. So it all goes back to my old observation: Fear of nuclear energy is vastly more dangerous than nuclear energy.
  - Krasnol 3y ago
    Wow, didn't expect this to get so ugly. What you people do to protect this dying technology is quite disgusting. This is not the only charity, and seriously? You didn't know why Belarus? You are not aware of damages to the genome? Why do you even participate in a discussion around this topic? WTF are you doing here? Do you get money for this?
    - mpweiher 3y ago
      What people do to denigrate this technology is and continues to be disgusting. Lying about "generational radiation damage", for example. Citing sources that in no way support those claims. Where does this unconstrained hatred come from?
      - Krasnol 3y ago
        I can't believe that you seriously displayed one more time your ignorance about the role of Belarus in the Chernobyl fallout. Don't you have any shame? How can this happen? How can't you get any doubt and at least spend a few seconds googling? A picture would suffice.
        peterfirefly 3y ago
        It is very clear now who is ignorant and who is not.
- peterfirefly 3y ago
  So you both want to claim Chernobyl as an argument AND you want to claim that you don't? You know why Chernobyl was a disaster. You know fully well why it has got nothing to do with the safety of current Western reactors, older Western reactors (except for some of the very first test reactors from the 40's and maybe early 50's), or even older Soviet reactors. It was a completely f*cked up design that nobody in the West would have allowed. You know fully well that it is an argument designed to mislead. You know fully well that you are the one misleading people here.

Krasnol 3y ago

> Ok, please explain what you mean by "results of radiation throughout generations". https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ > Or how nuclear power in France can go wrong if you didn't have either a Chernobyl scenario in mind or I'm no nuclear scientists, but even they were unable to prevent the accidents which happened. So what's your point? Or didn't you get mine?

mpweiher 3y ago
> https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ https://www.chernobyl-international.com/ LOL. Just tried a browser that goes through their illegal consent page without giving consent and it's actually worse than I had imagined. It's all about orphans in Belarus, which for some reasons becomes "the Chernobyl region". No connection to radiation or the nuclear accident whatsoever. Certainly no "results of radiation throughout generations" Oh, one claimed connection: "The effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster on the Belarusian economy prevented building and repair efforts, leaving many orphanages and Day-Care Centres poorly equipped,..." Yeah...no. Trying to verify those claims brings up articles that link back to this "charity". Nicely circular. And of course what effects there are are socio-economic effects of the evacuation and stigmatization, not "results of radiation" For example: "The widespread public image of socially and economically depressed territories with traumatized populations often prevents economic activities from developing in the affected communities." Of course the effects of the fall of the Soviet Union and the dictatorship in Belarus vastly exceed the effects even of this stigmatization. We have similar effects in Fukushima, for example the fishermen have been negatively affected. Not by radiation, because the fish are totally fine+safe, but by people not wanting to buy fish from "Fukushima", because of their irrational fears. So it all goes back to my old observation: Fear of nuclear energy is vastly more dangerous than nuclear energy.
- Krasnol 3y ago
  Wow, didn't expect this to get so ugly. What you people do to protect this dying technology is quite disgusting. This is not the only charity, and seriously? You didn't know why Belarus? You are not aware of damages to the genome? Why do you even participate in a discussion around this topic? WTF are you doing here? Do you get money for this?
  - mpweiher 3y ago
    What people do to denigrate this technology is and continues to be disgusting. Lying about "generational radiation damage", for example. Citing sources that in no way support those claims. Where does this unconstrained hatred come from?
    - Krasnol 3y ago
      I can't believe that you seriously displayed one more time your ignorance about the role of Belarus in the Chernobyl fallout. Don't you have any shame? How can this happen? How can't you get any doubt and at least spend a few seconds googling? A picture would suffice.
      - peterfirefly 3y ago
        It is very clear now who is ignorant and who is not.
peterfirefly 3y ago
So you both want to claim Chernobyl as an argument AND you want to claim that you don't? You know why Chernobyl was a disaster. You know fully well why it has got nothing to do with the safety of current Western reactors, older Western reactors (except for some of the very first test reactors from the 40's and maybe early 50's), or even older Soviet reactors. It was a completely f*cked up design that nobody in the West would have allowed. You know fully well that it is an argument designed to mislead. You know fully well that you are the one misleading people here.