Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: flood (Score 1) 116

by nietsch (#47687935) Attached to: Fukushima's Biological Legacy

>> how few people died in Fukushima
Yes, many people died in Fukushima and the coastal region hit by the tsunami. About 20.000 people IIRC. None of those deaths are attributable to the meltdowns or radioactive release that occurred later. What I find disgusting is that you wilfully ignore and abuse the death of so many people to further your unrelated point about nuclear energy. That is as absurd as saying that the people on flight MH17 (shot down by anti-aircraft missle) died because your god does not like gays.

>> how harmless radioactivity/radiation is
It is and it isn't, it all depends on the dose. Here is your test: go outside and stand in the sun for 5 minutes. Nothing bad will happen while you bask in the radiation of that nuclear fusion reactor called the sun. Now do the same for a little longer at a higher elevation (ie on a mountaintop) and you will get a nasty sunburn. Too much exposure to UV will raise your chances of getting skin cancer dramatically, yet we still allow people to expose themselves that much.

>> that no one died to fallout in the atomic bombings, as it where air bursts
>> that no one died in Nagasaki or Hiroshima 'after' the fallout, as the ground level radiation was neglegtible [sic]

You do know that you are conflating two things: bombs meant to kill and destruct, and nuclear power (stations) designed to provide power and thus keep people alive? But as we have arrived at apparently your biggest fear: many more (>1000) atom bombs have been exploded since as tests, and somehow it did not destroy the world. Perhaps you need to re-evaluate your fear of atom bombs and nuclear power, and put it into perspective with the rest of the dangers that threaten humanity: The same as seen in the Fukushima Tsunami: drowning. One of the biggest threats is global warming, leading to an observable rise in sea levels. Nuclear energy may be (not so) dangerous stuff, fossil energy is unfortunately way more dangerous. The choice is between these two, because all renewable energy schemes are not ready.

>> that we have no clue and mix up Bequerels with Sieverts

Yes, that may be the case. Being proud of your ignorance is something I think should be punishable, go stand in the corner with your dunce hat on.

Comment: No, this is not what the developing world needs (Score 3, Insightful) 89

by nietsch (#46759883) Attached to: Paper Microscope Magnifies Objects 2100 Times and Costs Less Than $1

This is what some uni group thought up to score some charity points with. "look we made an scientific instrument that almost everyone can recognise but almost no-one knows how to use, and made a very cheap & crappy version of it. And since it is cheap, it is good for the poor".
No thanks. Cheap microscopes have been around for ages, probably because some parents think it will help their kid become a smart scientist later in life. None of these are used in the developing world for medical diagnosis, because there is no need for it. Sending millions of these overseas will help almost no-one.
Having access to a microscope does not make you a doctor nor will that allow you to make a reliable diagnosis. You need training for that, and that training is way more expensive than the microscope or other tools you will use. And training/people to train is something that is lacking, not microscopes.
Presenting a technical solution to this social problem will give them praise 'for the good work they do for the poor' but in reality they could have danced raindances in the poor's name to the same effect.

Comment: Re:not really a good comparison (Score 1) 1695

by nietsch (#33524708) Attached to: Rackspace Shuts Down Quran-Burning Church's Sites

What kind of 'fact' is that? it seems to me to be of the opinion kind.
You seem to be so scared shitless by whatever phony news/entertainment you consume, that you think that 'muslims' (probably all of them) will come to kill you with "grenade launchers, sharp knives, bombs, and guns" if you insult their faith. Islam sucks, just as christianity or any other religion (except the holy church of the flying spaghetti monster, off course). What will happen to me now I made this deliberate insult to all these violent religions..?

Comment: Re:That's what they said about the USSR (Score 1) 691

by nietsch (#31494016) Attached to: China To Connect Its High-Speed Rail To Europe

Maybe 10 hours flying, but that is omitting the 4 hours to spend in customs/security checks or whatever the fashion is then.
The reason why America has not electrified a lot of their tracks is just plain costs, it is cheaper only for short-sighted people/managers to run diesels. With electricity, you can build a windmill next to the track for every few kilometres to defray the costs. You cannot do that with diesel, nor can you put more diesel back in the tank when you brake.
Thinking that a diesel lorry is cheaper than a train of them is deluding yourself. Metal on metal contact for the wheels is much more economical, especially combined with the constant motion of a train. The problems/costs rise when the next step in distribution is not adapted or suited very well for train transport. But there are no indications that cannot be overcome with technology.

"No problem is so formidable that you can't walk away from it." -- C. Schulz

Working...