• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Na it’s dumb. The issue with the magic rocks isn’t the direct consequences like with the fire. The issues with these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 month ago

      Yeah, the environmental issues that are orders of magnitude less problematic than literally pumping the toxic chemicals into the atmosphere like with fossil fuels, vs comparatively miniscule amount of solid waste to store inert.

      • @T156
        link
        English
        51 month ago

        Coal smoke is more radioactive than the outside of a fission reactor anyhow.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 month ago

        The comparison is dumb. The subject was the comparaison, and not what type of energy is better for the environment.

        You’re interpreting.

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

      What consequences?
      There are no consequences for animals in Chernobyl, they are thriving in all aspects, even mammals living underground (mutations are fiction).

      People that didn’t leave the exclusion zone died of old age there.

      Life on Earth had to deal with all sorts of radiation.

      What caused mass extinction was ecosystem change, eg via global climate change.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 month ago

      these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

      You bury them in concrete, done. Nuclear waste isn’t an issue and hasn’t ever been

      • @spirinolas
        link
        English
        -21 month ago

        Yeah, just bury it and make it someone else’s problem in the future.

        I’ve seen this train of thinking somewhere. Spoiler alert, it was a bad idea.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 month ago

          someone else’s problem in the future

          Nope, if you bury it in a few inches of concrete it’s literally never a problem again unless society somehow completely collapsed and all knowledge of nuclear waste is lost

          I’ve seen this train of thinking somewhere. Spoiler alert, it was a bad idea.

          I’ve seen this level of confidence from people who don’t know what they’re talking about before. Spoiler alert, it’s embarrassing for you

          • @spirinolas
            link
            English
            -2
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I’ve seen this level of confidence from people who don’t know what they’re talking about before. Spoiler alert, it’s embarrassing for you

            Ahahahahahah! Oh the irony! Drop the smugness.

            Dude, you don’t know as much about nuclear energy as you think. But you know even less about concrete.

            if you bury it in a few inches of concrete it’s literally never a problem again

            I’m putting this one on Facebook for my civil engineer friends to laugh at. It’s going to be a riot. Concrete is pourous as hell and doesn’t last much on a grand scale. And on top of that you think a few inches is enough? This is nuclear waste, it’s not Emma Dorothy from Sunday school!

            Stop embarrassing yourself.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              4
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Drop the smugness.

              Nah, you want to start it when you’re talking out your ass, imma keep it when I’m correcting you.

              Dude, you don’t know as much about nuclear energy as you think. But you know even less about concrete.

              Oh wow, good scientific counterpoints! If only you could Google it and find out for yourself…

              Stop embarrassing yourself

              You really should, 5s in Google and I found exactly what I’m talking about:

              I simplified with just using “concrete” because “they fill a container with inert gas and pour concrete around it and it’s fine” is easily shortened to “dump concrete around it”

              Shit, theres a YouTube video of someone kissing one of those, standing next to it for the whole video, nothing happens at all. You have no idea what you’re talking about

              Facebook

              Oh, I see I’m dealing with a mental deficient here, I apologize for assuming you were of standard mental functionality

              • @spirinolas
                link
                English
                -31 month ago

                Dude, I’m not wasting my time correcting you. You made up your mind, keep the bike.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 month ago

                  Rather than learn and admit you were wrong you cower away and pretend it’s because I’m wrong despite literally showing you what I was talking about

                  Be better

                  • @spirinolas
                    link
                    English
                    11 month ago

                    Sure, whatever. Have a nice day.