No, it is not. Expecting an antenna to be useful without power is absurd

No, it does not. Solar is proven technology. And when a rocket fails to make it to space and explodes, it doesn't spread Plutonium all over Florida.

When will the nuke-nutters stop trying to bankrupt economies with nonsensical dreams of nuclear power being a panacea, when it is the most expensive power source that humans have ever conceived and accordingly has never been even remotely economically viable?

I don't see what the problem is. Its isn't brain surgery.

That's just great, right in the middle of the game. If this messes with the broadcast, they're gonna have some pissed off sports fans that day I can tell you.

I think the more offensive uses of it was recently depicted in the movie "Kill the Messenger:" alleged drug dealer is arrested, and all his possessions, including his house, is confiscated; prosecution fails to convict drug dealer, yet the forfeiture is never returned. In this instance we have the benefit of knowing they were not innocent, so we don't care as much. Except that innocent, truly innocent people are tried and some are convicted and some acquitted, and their property is forfeit and never returned. The problem is not that shady people are getting shafted, the problem is that people found not guilty never see their property again if it was forfeit. This is sort of in line with going against Blackstone's ratio.

Considering even today, only about 13% of power globally is nuclear generated, and it is not clear we will still be generating nuclear fission power in 100 years, or any more than we are now, I agree. Though its easy to trace the bombs' effects in the future, the incandescent light bulb had a far greater impact on society and the population explosion, and industrialization of that time had greater impact on the environment.

Then again, an argument could be made that the fulcrum for the advancement of our species occured with the invention/introduction of true perspective in art, which isn't even technology.

Its epistemology. Plato never heard of post-modernism. What you perceive is not truth! Perception only creates belief, which is not truth, yet belief is one truth-bearer. You may need to take an intro to philosophy course before you can understand the nature of truth.

NO. You really need to learn what a strawman argument is.

ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL

no subsidies, no taxes

ABSOLUTE FACT:

Nuclear power is the most expensive way the human race has ever employed to create electricity.

Its great for submarines, and making fuel for bombs, but in commerce, its a dog. Every single other way to manufacture energy is less expensive, given equal development. Yes, even solar. Had 1/10th the resouces been poured into solar energy development, solar would have been at parity with the cost of generating energy with fossil fuels by the early 70's. As it is, we may have to way another 5 years for that to finally happen.

What makes it true is economics.

A May 2008 study by the Congressional Budget Office concludes that a carbon tax of $45 per tonne of carbon dioxide would probably make nuclear power cost competitive against conventional fossil fuel for electricity generation

Nuclear power is a dog and always has been. What made it so attractive was the need for fuel for nuclear bombs, not the economics of building and safely operating a plant, nor the cost of the power it produces.

Get your head out of your ass. MONEY is what makes nuclear power crap, on the basis of economics alone, it will never compete with alternative power, and that is especially true today when all alternatives are being developed independently, instead of one single massive and massively expensive development by a government with nearly unlimited resources. Without big government money, nuclear power could never have been developed in the first place. Without big government money, you cannot build a nuclear power plant. Not one nuclear power plant in the entire world was ever built that didn't go at least 50% over estimated cost, and thats dozens of millions of dollars

per plant. It doesn't make good economic sense. It never will.

Your argument is fallacious. The inherent danger of or the damage to the environment of any other power source does not in any way make nuclear more attractive, which has the potential to be far more deadly. We make it safe by making it even more expensive. And you're flat out wrong: Nuclear power is inherently more expensive than other sources of power, and always has been.

I think you mean President Carter, the nuclear engineer.

But your strawman (danger) is irrelevant. Nuclear Power fails because of cost, because there is no more expensive way to produce power, not because of how dangerous the waste is once its forgotten about in 200 years.

CDE is ok, but SunDew?
Best
console
evar.

Obviously, you've never played ESB Textures? Where we're vectoring, we don't need textures.

Unfuckingbelievable. Reasonably concerned individuals are "ninnies?" It doesn't matter if the entire earth was covered in nuclear waste, absurdists like you will always say "why is this even news?"

WTF is up with nuke-nutters love-affair with this insanely expensive, forever deadly garbage? THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE MORE EXPENSIVE AND MORE DIRTY THAN NUCLEAR -- once you add up development costs and indefinite waste storage costs. Had we not needed fuel for bombs, and grossly overestimated that need by a factor of 100, we never even would have developed commercial fission reactors... because... cost. It would have sat on the drawing board as long as the waste problem was not solved reasonably, which it never can be because it only takes a generation or two before everyone forgets everything about which those earlier generations were concerned. Where did Abraham Lincoln leave his favorite pen? Answer that, definitively, before telling me safely storing waste for 250--> 30K years is even remotely possible.

Oh, but nuclear radiation kills less people than slippery showers? Except that all it takes is one good accident to throw your bullshit stats into chaos.

They'll last longer if stored vertically, and "tails out," i.e. wrapped backwards, so you have to rewind the entire tape before playing (reduces magnetic ghosting). Digitize that as soon as you can. Every time you play it on the tape deck, sound quality degrades slightly and never comes back.

I'm on your side. But even I know that is false except in the pure sciences such as mathematics and logic. You need to brush up on your epistomolgy, perhaps talk to some blind men about what an elephant is. Objective Truth may exist elsewhere, but it is unknowable.