and putting "period" at the end makes you right? LOL and i certainly don't recall typing, "you don't know what it's like". ever been in a gunfight? no need to answer, you're right and everyone else is wrong. and now to check out of this because mr right is a pain in the azz
and putting "period" at the end makes you right? LOL and i certainly don't recall typing, "you don't know what it's like". ever been in a gunfight? no need to answer, you're right and everyone else is wrong. and now to check out of this because mr right is a pain in the azz
*edited* I cooled down and decided what I said was over the top. There has been enough bashing of veterans, and in that respect I retract my statement. Lasher, I apologize for what I called you, though I still don't respect your opinion.
Last edited:
@lasher is a highly decorated Marine with Combat Service/wounded in Vietnam, it is only a forum, relax man. Maybe realize that the 'ol timers might just have seen a thing or two and are generally more set in their ways than us young pups. If you feel that a POS is equivalent to a PITA, then I suppose a class in proportionality could do some good. There are, will be and have been some real dicks on OSA, @lasher is simply not one of them.
I respect his dedication and service to our country, but not his opinion nor how he treated my rebuttal. Had he came back and said he felt I was wrong, I wouldn't have popped off in my reply. However, when I presented a counter to his opinion he started the name calling. I don't care what a person has done, seen or been awarded for, treat me like that and I will call you out on it. I may be new to these forums, but I don't sit well with that kind of treatment. There are others here that have disagreed with me and yet did not resort to name calling (save for a few misguided judgement on my political party of choice).
This is why every citizen within 25 miles of any nuke plant can get free radioactive contamination kits and radiation drugs for their home?
I've attended training classes at the Perry nuke plant in Cleveland Ohio for the record and have gone through all of the introductory info/safety classes just to gain admittance to the property. True, they are pretty much radiation free, but let's not muddy the waters on coal plants. Radiation is a natural occurring phenomenon at low levels not harmful to humans in their everyday lives . Sunlight is a much more dangerous radiation. It can kill you in a short period of time.
Every scrap yard in the country monitors oil pipe for radiation exposure. Some have it, some don't. Same with coal burners. Some coal has low levels of radioactivity, and some has none. Depends on where it's mined for the most part.
I'll agree with that. Honestly, I hope I can live to see the day that all nuclear and coal energy production is stopped and replaced with something that is clean and renewable. Right now there isn't much that can replace the amount of power we use. Solar and wind, though they help, just don't cut it. Hydrogen fusion is promising if it can be done at a cost effective level and if they can produce hydrogen from water in a economical way. This could also be used to power vehicles. So instead of having to plug in an electric car you could fill it with plain tap water (though here you would want to filter it due to the hard water). That is the kind of innovation we need to stride towards.
Yes, but radioactive materials do different amounts of damage depending upon A) what kind of particles they're emitting (alphas, betas, or gammas), B) the energy level at which they're doing so, and C) where in the body they end up. Anything coming out of a smokestack stands a very good chance of ending up in your lungs, which is a very bad place for any emitter.
Alphas are hugely destructive, but have no penetrating power--a sheet of paper will stop them. Betas are less damaging, but have a bit more penetration. Gammas are the least destructive (though still dangerous), but penetrate with impunity--they take lead, or substantial amounts of concrete, or similar to stop. External gamma sources are more dangerous to long-term health than external alphas (though external alphas can cause wicked radiation burns). Alpha emitters taken internally, though are Bad News.
Believe me, I'm particularly well-versed in things nuclear just due to personal curiosity. "Radiation" is an incredibly broad category; "radioactive" means "ionizing radiation" (which light is not), and even then can be subdivided by particle and energy. Most people don't even know coal ash has any radioactive material in it, but they know "nuclear = scary." The lack of concern over coal is driven by ignorance just as much as the fear of nuke plants is (for that matter, MRI is called such because the proper name, nuclear magnetic resonance imaging, tended to spook the sheep, even though it refers to a cell's nucleus, not an atom's).
Clean would be nice, but it's not viable yet. I'm actually a huge proponent of nuclear in the short-to-medium term, but we have to start by using modern reactor designs. New designs--many of which use different fuel cycles--just don't have the same safety issues as older ones. Unfortunately, ignorance drives political sentiment, so those designs will probably never be put into production service on American soil.
Filling your car with tap water will never be viable. To use the water as a fuel source, you have to split the hydrogen off from the oxygen; that takes energy. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty clear about not being able to get something for free. As for having a reactor--fusion or fission--on a car, that's just not viable. Spacecraft use radiothermal generators--that is, they take their energy directly from the heat of nuclear decomposition, not from a controlled chain reaction. They lose power over time (directly in proportion to the half-life of the element), and they only generate a handful of watts.
Last edited:
Let's continue.
NAFTA and the Unions both contributed to the decline of the rust belt states, but Democratic policies were and continue to be issues that plague cities and their economies.
Detroit, Baltimore, St Louis, New Orleans, DC, Seattle, and so on are prime examples of failed policies resulting in high crime, high poverty and high homelessness among the population. How anyone can continue to vote to remain broke and homeless is beyond me but they continue to vote to remain that way.
Living on handouts is not living.
Back on trade.
Trump is fighting for the short game. He has only 8 years to get things right on trade. The last 4-5 or even longer administrations have slowly eroded fair trade in poor negotiations giving other countries a trade advantage. There was a 100% Tariff in the 70's for American built vehicles sold to Korea for example when Nixon was President. This inequality isn't a new thing.
Our allies like Great Britain and Germany and Japan were given trade advantages after WWII to build their economies back to normal status. If it were not for the US, they would all be speaking russian now.
In fairness we charge Canada some tariffs for their soft wood products like building materials, although its not near as high as they charge us for dairy products. There are more examples, but you get my point I hope.
His brashness in his comments and tweets is foreign to other countries vs past administrations, and it puts him in a position of power.
When a big bully came up on you in a playground back in the day and threatened you, did you immediately punch the bigger guy in the nose, or did you ask if there was something you could talk about to diffuse the situation?
I'm betting like the most of us, you wanted to talk. Trump wins..... The art of the deal.
It's worked with Kim, it's working with trade.
There is no trade war now. It's the media narrative and politicians way of striking fear into voters and those that watch or listen to their TV programs. Canada, GB and Germany buck up because they have to. They know they have been taking advantage of us for years, and they don't want to lose the revenu.
Back to tranny's.
I'm not homophobic. I've always said it ain't a real party until the full blown tranny in a boa shows up.
But when your doing a tour on an isolated mountain top site with zero access other than helo and your NCOIC is an aggressive homo that likes to watch you take showers in an open enclosure, it puts one into a very bad situation. It took a full, "we are going to mutiny" message from 14 guys to HQ before the situation was handled quietly, and the offender was just moved to another unit. Not right.
Nothing different than a male superior subordinating a female because of rank, etc, or a lesbian aggressor.
Pruitt. Love the guy again, and your argument that he is stacking the deck with crony's is really not fair. Media BS.
How many EPA leaders in the past that were pro warming until that proved to be fake news with false data to create a narrative for democratic donors promoting solar and wind hired anybody that were not their crony's?
Zero. Name me one that wasn't.
So why would you fault Pruitt for hiring who he does?
Just this month, the antarctic recorded the coldest temperatures in history. The climate is warming??? We have discussed and debunked the warmers ad nauseum on this forum so you might want to do some searching for past posts.
Nuclear/solar vehicles will never happen without some amazing technology. It's a fantasy. Cost prohibitive. What did that Mars Rover cost?
Wind farms would fail in a few months if not for government subsidies, solar farms are not profitable, disposal of them after they are spent is expensive, and the ethanol subsidies would fail in a period of time as well, so how is all that alternative energy helping us?
Very little if any in reality.
The carbon footprint to produce one wind tower can never be repaid.
I'm not against alternative energy resources, but they have to stand on their own back legs without government subsidies.
I'm not against a government startup for something promising, but it must carry a time limit. The taxpayers cannot be strapped with unending subsidies like wind and solar.
Your example of the Ford and I'll include an example of a Toyota diesel available in Europe would greatly benefit the US in fuel conservation but the EPA's overreaching rules don't allow either into the country because of stupid rules. Pruitt is going to help us on that.
Now explain to me how he is pandering to the far right?
There are those of us in the middle that are not swayed by the media narrative and don't fall under your classification of far right that choose to research on our own.
You have landed on OSA. Welcome to our world.
I've had some pretty specific training in radiation, and your correct, there are different levels. I didn't bring it out as it wasn't pertinent to the discussion at hand.
For the record, in the "clean" nuclear power plants you talk about, you have to wear a radiation monitor on your person at all times.
In a coal fired power plant, you don't have to wear anything because the levels are so low that it's not even a discussion point.
Similar threads
