Astrophysicists are looking for dark matter because there does not appear to be enough normal matter to generate the gravity needed to spin galaxies the way they are spinning, or to hold the universe together. What if we didn't need dark matter. Maybe there's an alternate solution. One so simple it will make people do face-palms. Think of the typical diagram of warped space time around a planet. Like a bowling ball stretching a rubber sheet. A bug travelling on the rubber sheet will travel towards the bowling ball even though it thinks it is going straight because the sheet is curved in the time dimension. This has been confirmed because if we synchronize two clocks on earth , then put one in orbit, the one on earth records time more slowly. Think about that. The "gravity" well shows displacement in time. But a clock placed in that well shows time flowing more slowly... So the net time displacent should be growing. The well should be getting deeper. Ergo gravity increases over time. Since most of the stars in the galaxy are billions of years old than the sun, they could have 2 or 3 times the gravity. No dark matter needed.

Knock it off. Their are dozens of studies going back to the 1970s showing nutrient depletion in crops due to poor soil management. Bullying people into accepting the outrageous lies of the climate doomers just makes everyone realize how fake most of climate pseudoscience really is. Climate loons are worse than the Nazis.

Thos phenomenon is not new. It has been documented since the 1970s and it has nothing to do with the global warming boogeyman. Just because two things are correlated in time, doesn't mean there is a causal link. The depletion of nutrients in crops is due to soil depletion. Modern farming methods use the soil as a holding tank for commercial fetilizer. The ground is never allowed to lie fallow, or enriched with decaying organic matter. It can be fixed with healthier farming techniques, without the climate doomers using it as another doom fetish plaything.

Remember folks, use wisdom. When you read an article trashing nuclear power, it is rarely motivated by concern over your welfare. It is usually folks making big money off of wind and solar, trying to knock out a competitor that is very likely to bankrupt them in fair competition.

Just curious. Does that 6% savings interest come with a clause that says he owns your money and doesn't have to give it back, like facebutt does with your photos?

Does any of this involve injecting a chip labeled with "666" under the user's skin? Asking for a friend...

Most of the people arguing against nuclear are making huge bucks off of wind and solar. It is their greed, and a lust for the power over people's lives that comes with being the broker of an unreliable and inadequate power supply that is the prime motivator to deny the world cheap, reliable and most of all abundant nuclear power.

Did you see the episode of "Archer" set on a dirigible?

Givevit up. People just aren't scared of nuckesr anymore. The old boogeyman arguments have become unconvincing. It will only take one or two successful SMRs to make solar and wing look like the unreliable mess they already are. The populacexwill not allow their livescto be controlled by the socialist green schemers. Clean reliable and abundant Nuclear IS the future.

No military anywhere in the world has ever detonated a nuclear plant. Given the size andvhardening of nuclear facikities, a weapon thatcwouldcdo so has never been built. Othrr yhan a nuclear earhead, which makes targeting the nuclear facility pretty muchnpointless. Who would have guessed thst someome making up imaginary scenarioscto frighten people away from nuclear power was invested in solar power. Solar is infinitely more fragile than nuclear. A single terrorist with an AK47 andxa box of bullets could darken a city. A single hand grenade could turn the lithium battery farm storing night-time power into a massive conflagration spewing toxic ash for miles. The world is changing. Solar was an expensive abberation..Nuclear IS the future.

The reason that Chernobyl was such a disaster is a HUGE difference between Western and Soviet reactor designs. Western countries care about their civilian populations, so they require containment domes over their reactors This is why no one died at 3 Mile Island. Sovietcarchitects did not care about public safety, so they skipped the expense of a containment dome. And so you had a spill at Chernobyl. This being said, BOTH design wete not meta stable. When the coolant ran out they sped up and melted. Reactors used in nuclear subs are metastable. The coolant is necessary to moderate the neutron flux. Lose the coolant and they stop reacting, without intervention. Future reactors will be metastable, or they should not be built.

When I worked at the US Postal service, their first networked Time and Attendance (Time card) system used AT&T 3B series Unix computers. They had the Western Electric WE32000 chipset, similar to the Motorooter 68000 processor in the AT&T PC. They were all 32bit systems when the rest of the world was 16 bit. (Remember the Data General Nova, and the DEC PDP11 ). The problem was that the AT&T machines were too advanced. They had a 1Mb LAN when PCs were using 9.6K dial up lines. They could address 4GB of memory when PCs had 640K. Unix fans LOVED them, but when DEC released the 32bit VAX computer, it was the end of the 3B line. All of this history is lost on the "just reboot" zombies of the cult of Microslop.

I don't see either the conspiracy theorists or the debunkers using math. Lots of name calling and innuendo. No probability calculations.

Manhattan project workers mainly died young of cancer. So did thousands of civilians who were down wind of the blast.

No, selling pardons is a democrat move.