• SomeLemmyUser
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Now calculate how many generations of turkeys will be eaten till the waste stops killing people

    Edit: can’t believe how many people here are falling for nuclear. Have you all learned nothing from what companies did with fossil fuels? Taking the profits and leaving humanity with a fucked up world? And now you are falling for the same stuff with nuclear again, I assume this is the discourse in america which is so scewed? Here in Europe people are not that naive… Even the ones in France, which is quite into nuclear are reasonable and see the waste problem normally.

    And here on Lemmy people really come and say “nuclear waste isn’t dangerous, it didn’t kill anyone”

    Wtf people?!

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 day ago

      Nuclear waste is indeed a problem, however it is a contained problem that can be isolated. Oil’s byproduct are distributed into the atmosphere and are killing every living thing on earth. Do you know how many people die every year due to pollution from burning fossil fuels? It’s orders of magnitude worse. The fear of nuclear waste, while absolutely an issue, is so incredibly blown out of proportion compared to the silent killer that is fossil fuels.

      • SomeLemmyUser
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 day ago

        You people always come and compare to oil.

        THATS A STRAWMAN NOONE IS ARGUING FOR OIL

        yes short term the rising temp by climate gases is prob worse, but you need to compare it to actual alternatives, like wind, water, sun -.-

        Everyone fucking knowes that oil needs to be stopped from being used better yesterday then today, but this doesn’t make nuclear any better

          • SomeLemmyUser
            link
            fedilink
            English
            120 hours ago

            Its saying Corona isn’t dangerous because cancer is worse.

            When the actual comparison should be made between corona and getting a corona antibody shot.

            Sure you can compare nuclear with fossils and will see: both lots of downsides bad, we shouldn’t use them. The problem is when you stop there, don’t compare it to wind, solar, water, and then go around hyping nuclear.

            • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
              link
              fedilink
              English
              113 hours ago

              I specifically pointed out that nuclear energy has its issues. Holy crap, you just accused others of strawmanning when they aren’t, then strawman yourself.

              We’re done with this conversation. Nothing productive will come of it. Learn to have a productive conversation instead of stifling others.

              Cheers.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Things lemmy loves: imperial propaganda, corporate propaganda, genocide, joe and kamala, liberalism, blaming (non)voters, anti-russian racism, etc.

      Still better than reddit.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          92 days ago

          Yes, radiation can kill people decades later, but so does pollution from burning fossil fuel. BTW, your link talks about nuclear accidents, not the number of people killed by nuclear wastes produced normally, which is what you claimed is killing people. A bit of a misdirection on your part, isn’t it?

          • SomeLemmyUser
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 day ago

            No one is arguing for fossils lol That’s a strawman

            And yes, I just gave you the first link I found, point given, but you wouldn’t argue that nuclear waste is safe to be around would you?

            • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              It’s not a strawman. It is 100% completely comparable to your point. You’re over here using deaths as a point against a technology when the current de facto standard society runs on us unimaginably worse.

              But keep handwaving and calling actual legitimate arguments against what you’re saying, “Strawmen.” It’s great and doesn’t stifle healthy discussions in any way.

              • SomeLemmyUser
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 day ago

                Dude, its a strawman because im not arguing pro fossil but pro solar, Wind, Walter and economical and social change.

                • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  2
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  To be arguing pro solar, wind, water, and social and economic change, you would have had to have mentioned them. The only things you said were isolated anti nuclear rhetoric, lol. Ultimately, I agree with you, but read back through the comment thread, perhaps.

                  tl;dr - It was not a strawman, but opposition to your comments as existing in a vacuum.

                  • SomeLemmyUser
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    120 hours ago

                    Its like saying electric cars are good for the environment just because benzin cars are worse. Its not true. Both are bad for the environment.

                    The nuclear waste is a fucking problem, no matter if burning coal also is a fucking problem