3
DavidColeIntrepid 3 points ago +3 / -0

https://www.livescience.com/amp/19060-gallery-microscopic-images-viruses-bacteria-insects.html

And here's viruses under a microscope. Not "soap bubbles and dead cells".

You choose the absolute stupidest things to be skeptical about and NOT be skeptical about so hard that I think you're paid to be here spreading bullshit.

What else am I supposed to think when you say up is down and black is white and air conditioning is patriarchy like a neon haired leftist?

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

A nuclear bomb is literally the absolutely least likely cause of radiation burn.

For entire cities? What about the complete decimation of any buildings? What about people being reduced to piles of smoldering carbon?

Why do you lack any sort of skepticism when some smooth brain says "viruses are dead cells and soap bubbles"? Hypocrite much?

Why would a chemical burn look different? I'm not a doctor and you most certainly aren't.

4
DavidColeIntrepid 4 points ago +4 / -0

Zionist foreign agents bankrolled by Soros. Communists. "The government" is a bullshit boogyman.

3
DavidColeIntrepid 3 points ago +3 / -0

Scoff all you want. They control the schools which means your children will follow them lock step.

If we turned everything around this very second it would still take 20 years to get these crt sjw fanatics out of our institutions.

That's what happens when you allow child raping mossad agents like bobby Maxwell buy the publishing company that prints all the school textbooks.

4
DavidColeIntrepid 4 points ago +4 / -0

Hitler being part jew doesn't preclude anything he did. In fact, it makes his hatred much more believable. Not that 6 million died or any of that shit.

Hitler is what happens when you get a real "self hating jew" instead of the ones who are just sick of the propaganda.

Hitler's lawyer proves in court that his grandfather was in fact jewish.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you don't understand %20 is HTML then we can't have a conversation.

This entire time I've held your hand like your mom dragging you through the grocery store like "C'mon little Timmy. You can do it" while you cry your eyes out throwing shit off the shelves and calling people niggers.

Maybe you should read into MSRs and LWRs a little bit more than just the link title, buckaroo.

And with that, I'll leave your Cartman ass in the middle of the aisle like your Dad who went out for cigarettes one day and never came back.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

I know what I fucking sourced, guy. It's not 20 percent any-fucking-thing.

You have less than 20 percent the brain capacity of any blacks, genius.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

It says it on your link title. 20%. Read your link title.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2678551/when-to-encode-space-to-plus-or-20

Bruh... Those are fucking stand ins for spaces.

You know as much about reactors as you do HTML, which is to say nothing at all.

The more mad you get the more it proves your ignorance.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

Created plutonium. Enrichment.

So is it creating or enriching?

sooner becomes the concern of it being used to weaponize. As in Enrichment.

So using molten salt is "weaponizing" it? I didn't read that in any of your links.

You are the epitome of a dumb troll.

No U

I am not reading your fuck dumb links

You're not reading YOURS either, apparently.

20 percent less waste is still waste.

Where in the literature does it say %20?

don't care about its bullshit the nigger ad campaign it ain't even built yet

I think we can both agree... Fuck bill gates.

This isn't some "new" thing. OP is confused, as you were. It's not "sodium". This technology has been around a while and wasn't utilized PRECISELY because you can't weaponize the byproducts, because the byproducts are infinitely smaller.

If by "run off" you meant water, there is none. And if you want to split hairs about a tiny iota of starter material and call it %20 to cover up your confusion, then we can't have a conversation.

You shouldn't get so mad about technical information, it only proves you don't know what you're talking about.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

The isotope when in fission beomes plutonium

How much exactly and how does that compare to LWRs?

Hence they are concerned about it being weaponized. Enrichment

The main MSR concept is to have the fuel dissolved in the coolant as fuel salt, and ultimately to reprocess that online. Thorium, uranium, and plutonium all form suitable fluoride salts that readily dissolve in the LiF-BeF2 (FLiBe) mixture, and thorium and uranium can be easily separated from one another in fluoride form. Batch reprocessing is likely in the short term, and fuel life is quoted at 4-7 years, with high burn-up. Intermediate designs and the AHTR have fuel particles in solid graphite and have less potential for thorium use.

Does it offgas plutonium if you don't use plutonium salts as a starter? Are these people full of shit when they say it's easy to seperate and reprocess?

And no, that's not "enrichment". Again, you're confused about the difference between LWRs and MSRs. MSRs do not require "enriched" anything and do not output "enriched" anything.

MSR generates less waste than conventional nuclear plants because these reactors do not use fuel rods that are used in LWRs. In addition, the reprocessing of highly radioactive fuel salts is not needed with FHR because it is efficient at burning transuranic elements.

https://www.anthropoceneinstitute.com/science/generation/msr/#:~:text=MSR%20generates%20less%20waste%20than,efficient%20at%20burning%20transuranic%20elements.

Read the damn links instead of trolling

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

So the old testament doesn't demand people NOT wear clothing made of linen and wool?

Notice I brought up nothing concerning Project Blue Beam or holograms?

That's what the post is about. This post was not meant to be a theological discussion. Happy to have one though.

Maybe take note of who posts what

I'm aware. Nothing is changed.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

So where in any of those does it say anything about "run off" or "enriching uranium as it's being used"?

Exactly how much difference is there in waste between MSRs and LWRs?

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because you argued like a dumb stupid nigger bitch.

At least I HAVE an argument instead of stomping my feet like a petulant child.

All nuclear reactors have nuclear waste.

How much, exactly?

All have run off

Especially the ones that don't have water, right?

Nuclear waste isn't burned when it is radioactive

Is there nuclear waste that isn't radioactive? And that isn't what I said. You're still confused.

Nuclear bombs are such a closed system

Oh really? How's that?

according to this dumb nigger is keeping dropping napalm afterwards.

Did you get distracted by finding some windows to lick? The fuck are you talking about?

that dumb nogger nuclear waste is burnt

Fuel.... Is used as fuel. This isn't rocket surgery, kid. For fucks sake.

is absorbed into the salts which never run out

What happened to all the "run off"?

You are the dumbest nigger alive

No U

Stop arguing with your betters.

Start having an argument instead of screeching like jussie smollett, child.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

creates nuclear fuel and it enriches

Nope. It neither "whips" or "nae naes" as well.

Even if it doesn't, there is still nuclear waste

How much? You mean a tiny tiny tiny amount of starter material which is burned up when in it's incorporated? Where's the data on that?

That isn't infinitely better than what we're doing now? Exactly as I said?

run off,

How, if MSRs are self contained?

It goes without saying.

Oh, really? You said water in a waterless reactor "goes without saying" too.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +1 / -0

The scriptures you're referring to are in the old testament

Oohhhhhh. The "context".

Yeah, kid. I know.

If you're going to contest someone's belief

If you're going to contest THE FACTS, kid, you should probably have some fucking evidence instead of being in your fee fees like jussie smollett, right?

So where's your evidence of the government creating holograms?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›