Re: Confused Logic 101

From: Tim O'Flaherty (pinwheelsfudge_at_gwi.net)
Date: 11/18/04 

Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:28:47 -0500

"Dan Bloomquist" <EXTRApublic21@lakeweb.com> wrote in message
news:41901057.6090908@lakeweb.com...
>
>
> Tim O'Flaherty wrote:
> > Sorry about that first one.
> >
> >
> > "Dan Bloomquist" <EXTRApublic21@lakeweb.com> wrote in message
> > news:418FC596.4080108@lakeweb.com...
> >
> >>
> >>Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
> >>
> >>>And the evidence is clear, nuclear proliferation is a serious threat.
> >>
> >>As long as you agree, the threat is human.
> >
> >
> > Nonsense.
> >
> > Something Tim failed to
> >
> >>understand.
> >
> >
> > I understand that your statement is nonsense, a semantic exercise that
puts
> > solutions to a very real problem, nuclear weapons proliferation, out of
> > reach since "the threat is human" and we can't do without them now can
we.
>
> You keep claiming nuclear power as the source of weapons. I'd call that
> nonsense.
>

You sure argue better when you restate my position. One mught say you are
putting words in my mouth, funny from one a touchy as you about that. I
claim that reprocessing spent fuel from power reactors is creating a growing
security risk due to growing inventories of separated plutionium. Do you
disagree with that statement?

> >
> > Nuclear comes from a Pandora's box. It would be seriously
> >
> >>difficult to put it back.
> >
> >
> > You don't have to put it back, you need to use it where it makes sense.
> >
> > One example of nuclear technology that doesn't make sense is
reprocessing
> > spent reactor fuel to yield stocks of Pu. Your (and R.B.'s) claims of
the
> > value of this as a fuel are belied by the fact that as reprocessing
> > continues the amount stored only grows larger. If it was so desirable
> > buyers would be purchasing it. They are not. Why not?
>
> Where did I ever make this claim?

I believe your (inaccurate) term was "ready to go fuel". You got oldtimers
disease or something?

 If reprocessed fuel is not used or
> stored for future use, Something is wrong with the use of the
> technology. I'd call that political, yes, again.
>
> > As that is most likely, there is no good
> >
> >>reason not to use it as a source of peaceful energy.
> >
> >
> > The unresolved issue of waste is a damn good reason.
>
> We could dump it in the ocean and you know that.
>

No I don't and niether do you, you only claim it as a last resort argument
after the idiocy of reprocessing or an endless series of Yucca Mountain like
repositories becomes indefensible..

> > Nuclear weapons and
> >
> >>nuclear energy are distinct applications of nuclear. Ending nuclear
> >>energy would likely have a 'negative' effect on weapons.
> >
> >
> > Reducing stocks of separated Pu would have a negative effect on
terrorist
> > opportunities. Continuing to reprocess increases those opportunities.
>
> We have been through this before and you _don't_ address it from what I
see.
>

That's crap of course. You deny reality rather than abandon your nuke
dreams.

>
> Get a decent newsreader.

My newsreader suits me just fine. If and when it doesn't I'll change. Deal
with it or don't, it matters little to me.

Regards,
Tim O

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Confused Logic 101
    ... >> Nonsense. ... >> Something Tim failed to ... > You keep claiming nuclear power as the source of weapons. ... claim that reprocessing spent fuel from power reactors is creating a growing ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Confused Logic 101
    ... Tim O'Flaherty wrote: ... > I understand that your statement is nonsense, ... You keep claiming nuclear power as the source of weapons. ... > One example of nuclear technology that doesn't make sense is reprocessing ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Confused Logic 101
    ... Tim O'Flaherty wrote: ... > I understand that your statement is nonsense, ... You keep claiming nuclear power as the source of weapons. ... > One example of nuclear technology that doesn't make sense is reprocessing ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Butt brained babes
    ... Tim wrote: ... That's nonsense - they're on the smaller side of the global average. ... not taken the test under valid conditions - conditions such that you see ... an improvement with practice invalidate the testing. ...
    (uk.people.support.depression)
  • Re: Can hydrogen deliver?
    ... > Tim O'Flaherty wrote: ... Japan was cited by you as a success story, ... >> reprocessing policy to prevent a further build up of surplus separated ...
    (sci.energy)
Loading