41 ms·
> If you can't be bothered to get simple scientific facts correct, why should I think that you're accurate on other things? Ahem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
by fein 14y ago
> If you can't be bothered to get simple scientific facts correct, why should I think that you're accurate on other things?
Ahem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Radiological_hazards http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Radiological_h...
If you can't react like a mature adult, why should I think that you can debate like one?
- anamax 14y agoA description of "the radiation risk" does not imply that there is a radiation risk. At some level, lead is radioactive. So is coal. So is atmospheric carbon. However, we don't consider any of these radiation risk. (They're instances of a more general rule, namely that almost everything is radioactive, which means that we can talk about the radiation risk of almost anything.) That's why your reference didn't talk about radiation dangers associated with depleted uranium.