«

[blastradius14]

Who said the dead fish were only near the reactor?

That would destroy the Fauna of the Sahara Desert

So we lose a few more succulents. If we wanted to preserve the Fauna there we could always move it to the gobi desert. The desert constantly shifts, many tons of sand a day travels many miles. Not much on the edges lives there, and the inner stuff would be safer someplace else.

I'd rather move a few succulents than nuke the planet.

[Doubler]

@ Doubler are you thinking of the matrix or something?

What do you mean?

[omg]

i think he meant your comment about discarding technoligy. not realising you meant when we have chewed up all the oil, coal and uranium/plutonium
altho you can always convert cars to run on vegetable oil :whistle:

[blastradius14]

Originally posted by Doubler+Aug 6 2005, 08:16 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Doubler @ Aug 6 2005, 08:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-troop18546@Aug 6 2005, 01:14 PM
Well, none of us would survive without technology, so I have to dissagree with you buddy.

We've made ourselves dependend on technology. We may have to try and find a way to undo that dependancy. That might be more sensible then putting all our effort into trying to expand the lifespan of technology no matter the cost. [/b][/quote]
Right here. We gotta learn to let go before computers take control of the world right? Or before we become all clones of ourselves? Or become....

altho you can always convert cars to run on vegetable oil

especially diesels. They are more effecient anyway.

[Doubler]

Right here. We gotta learn to let go before computers take control of the world right? Or before we become all clones of ourselves? Or become....

...So dependend on technology that we can't survive without when the times comes we have to, or become so obsessed with keeping technology alive that we're going to take excessive risks (like with nuclear power) to make it so.

EDIT: This reeks of argumentum ad hominem.

[omg]

or before global warming reaches a point where the ice caps melt. the weather systems of the world are going a bit crazy anyway. i dont think we should all go and live in hippycommunes but i do think that certain technoligys (like fuel cells|) need to be rapidly introduced and there needs to be a greater implemetation of renewable energy policies. and america not adhering to kyoto should mean that we put a trade embargo on the bstrds. let them know what it feels like and stop them from being so deluded about what effect there energy policies are having on the WHOLE world and not just there part of it.

[blastradius14]

The process of making fuel cells is very pollutive. If america starts a major producton facility for this, global warming will happen. Who cares if your car only drips water when its under water?

[Frodo]

Why do you want nuclear weapons?

Why must we build more 'powerful' weapons just to kill each other in new ways?

issed:

[Toxik]

because killing is the fastest way of solving problems
sad but true :ranting:

[The Niles]

I'm not against nuclear power and I understand the need for nuclear weapons. I would be in favour of building a new nuclear power station in the Netherlands if it should come to that but I do not think it is vital.

The whole argument against nuclear power is based on one thing and one thing alone, fear. A fear that has been fuelled for decades by the environmentalists. Fear of a catastrophe that at its very worst would kill far less people then die on our roads each year. A catastrophe who's likelihood of ever occurring is small bordering on none existent. Fear also of the having to deal with the phantom substance of "nuclear waste" that has been trumped up by the very same fear to be so horrible that any contact with it will immediately mean certain death and, not forgetting, it will be with us for the next one hundred thousand years. The truth is, of course, different. Current techniques of treating nuclear waste means that radioactive materials would have decayed to back-ground radiation levels (yes right now there is radiation flowing through your body and don't worry it wont kill you).
The hype against nuclear power has reached such epic proportions in the Netherlands that there is active talk of closing a reactor we have here that produces radioactive materials for medical research (such as radioactive dyes for doctors to be able to diagnose diseases). The argument is that we (and Belgium and much of Germany who are depended on this reactor as well) can get the materials from somewhere else. Not just is this attitude borderline schitsophrenic it is downright selfish.

What we need to do is stop letting ourselves be made to fear something that has proven itself to be useful and lifesaving. Stop listening to eco propaganda. Think about what it all means and then make a decision.