Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
Eugene which is south of me is banning new gas stoves. To me it myopic to focus on gas stoves.
I love hydroelectric but it’s does cause other problems. Salmon stocks have declined because of the dams. Salmon ladders don’t really work. I’d love to use hydro but we can destroy our environment doing it.
Everyone is skittish about nuclear but it’s the best source for clean energy. It’s very safe if it’s done correctly. Chernobyl was a product of communism.
No, Chernobyl was a result of bad engineering. And bad engineering can happen regardless of your chosen economic system.
A capitalist system would never cut corners on safety measures.
I sincerely hope this is sarcasm. I legitimately cannot tell around a place like this.
Three Mile Island is a sign of success. There was very little damage outside of the reactor. It could have been much worse and we have 40 years of reactor experience behind us. We have successfully run hundreds of reactors in our Naval Fleet with no major issues. To me that is validation nuclear is the way to go.
https://e360.yale.edu/features/blocked_migration_fish_ladders_on_us_dams_are_not_effective
Here is some Oregon history for you, Oregon use to have many canneries in Astoria and other parts of Oregon. The Salmon were plentiful and it provided a fish for all the canneries.
Between overfishing and the dams, there are now zero canneries in Oregon. Bumble Bee Food started in Oregon canning Salmon.
The reactor didn’t melt down. There was a partial meltdown but nothing on a large scale.
You use such weird language when you write. Have you ever thought about writing like an adult? Chernobyl very much was a product of communism.
Partial meltdown. Proof of the safety of the design.
I am not sure the point you are trying to make.
https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-facts-know-about-three-mile-island
No deaths. No injuries. No damage to the environment.
It shows the safety of nuclear power.
and?
It was a partial meltdown. It wasn't a full meltdown. It was an event like Chernobyl.
Most people when they talk about meltdowns are talking about nuclear disasters and full meltdowns. They’re not taking about a partial meltdown.
You seem to struggle with words and the meanings of them. You’re so focused on being “right” that you just look foolish.
Do you disagree that three mile island is a success of our nuclear program? Or you just going to circle jerk in the corner for no apparent reason ?
The government document list it as a partial meltdown. That’s the official term being used.
I didn’t use an ad hominem. You seem to struggle with words. I used the term the government used and try to use it as an attack towards me. You now can’t stay on topic and can’t focus on the touch.
Do you disagree that three Mile was a success?
Partial meltdown. It’s in the cite I supplied.
I haven’t lost my temper. I’m just baffled by your behavior.
I’ll ask for at least the third time.
Do you see three Mile island as a success of the safety of our nuclear power ?
You’re acting in bad faith and trolling again. You refuse to stay on topic and want to circle jerking some imaginary victory instead of having a discussion.
You refuse to answer the question and instead what troll. Have a good day.
Warning: Rule 3
Pre-emptively characterizing future responses as sexual harassment is textbook bad faith.
Also, you both should've stopped a long time ago. Or, if you insisted on continuing, should've clarified the terms of discussion, which clearly revolved around what "meltdown" meant.