ydoaPs

Is that the truth? Isn't convincing someone that it's true that there is no such thing as truth somewhat self defeating?

I was thinking the same thing. Sans the antisemitism, it was hilarious.

Use the pressure fluid height relationship for the oil verses the pressure fluid height relationship for the water.

"'Human' to the discontinuous mind, is an absolute concept. There can be no half measures. And from this flows much evil."-Richard Dawkins

Perhaps you didn't get the water quite supersaturated.

http://www.unitednuclear.com/chem.htm 2 ounces for $3, 4 ounces for $6, 8 ounces for $12

It's not making ice; it's making sodium acetate crystals.

Link doesn't work. If it's the video with the salt and burning straw, it's a fake.

Such as? Actually, I have handled the pieces and parts. So, we take power from the grid to power huge heaters. These heaters heat the primary coolant which in turn makes steam via the seam generators for use in the secondary system to generate electricity. Is that what you are saying? What about losses? There are losses to ambient in the primary. There are losses to ambient in the secondary. There are losses in every square inch of piping due to friction(ie headloss). There are turbine losses. There are IR2 losses in the electrical part of the turbine. There is no way you could even pass this off as a power GENERATING system. You must not only power these heaters, but also your coolant pumps, condensate pumps, feed pumps, oil pumps, pressurizer heaters, and of course the lighting. Where does all of this power come from? If you are going to destroy a city, would you use one bomb or hundreds(maybe thousands)? The rules of debate still apply in the civil courts. It is not up to the defendant to prove his or her innocence. Ever hear of the phrase Innocent until proven guilty"? How are you going to tell me it doesn't work if you can't even tell me how it is supposed to work? It is where the steam demand is controlled, various plant conditions are monitored, and the electric plant is controlled. Which control panel? What is the power source for a NUCLEAR submarine? Do you think we run the diesel all the time? That's pretty bad for your health if we are below snorkel depth. Then why have the big heaters in the first place? No. We all know each others jobs and what they are doing. We work together as a team to make sure nothing goes wrong and to diffuse the situation when it does. So what afflicted the survivors of Chernobyl? A nucleus is composed of positively charged particles and neutral particles. We all know like charges repel. If there is no energy to be had, how does the nucleus stay together? That's hilarious! You have no idea how little time we can get from our batteries. Using the battery is our LAST resort. I have another question. What happened to Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and SL-1 if nuclear power does not exist?

I have just as much proof of faked altitudes as you have of faked radiation readings. Actually, I have. I know exactly what every part of the core and the associated power plant does. I even know what it's made of and why. I know more about neutrons than you ever conceivably thought you wanted to know. I work with the reactor EVERY DAY. We know exactly what happens; we have to so we know what to do if things go wrong. Your only explanation for the continued radiation readings is that they could be faked. Why doesn't the same "elementary logic" apply to the altitudes? Burden of proof is not a fallacy; it is the way logical debate works. Even courtrooms rely on the concept of burden of proof. If you had studied logical debate at all, you would know this. Congratulations, you officially have zero knowledge in the area of nuclear physics. Get back to me when you know something. Please, tell me how my reactor works, then. While you're at it, tell me why I am required to wear a thermo-luminescent dosimeter every day at work.

Don't you know how easily altitudes can be faked? The burden of proof lies upon the person making the claim, i.e. you. You are saying it was a hoax, so YOU must provide the evidence. It is not up to us to prove your declarations false; the defense is under no obligation to prove the prosecution incorrect.. You're right. Fission doesn't exist. My reactor is just a room full of hamsters turning generators.

ANY evidence that it was faked? Or does it just not fit with your conspiracy theory?

Is it a crackpot thread?

Actually, I was thinking of myself and the majority of my co-workers.

Radiation doesn't contaminate things; contamination does. Radiation, however, can activate things. So, the incendiary bombs were laden with contamination to further the facade of US having detonated a nuclear weapon? I was actually thinking the same about you. He brought up a point which you repeatedly ignored. How so? Flaming is against the site rules.

Apparently since he is supposed to be the one who wrote the Law. What does any of this have to do with the e-mails?

You don't need a degree to work in the nuclear field. IIRC, a lot of contracts were recently written for power plants, so there is a good future. I guess that's good for me if I decide to go 6-and-out.

blue_cristal, what, may I ask, is it about this video that you found fascinating?

What's the point of this survey?

That one's not fair.

JaKiri, pimpin' Nixon was better, imo.

Feel free to go dig up a better source of statistics. I, however, don't feel as though it is completely relevant to the topic at hand.

According to the site linked, irreligious DOES mean lack of belief in one or more deities. I've never seen any deities in Buddhist texts, but I haven't read all of them yet, either. Buddhist was ~5%, so subtract that from my estimate.

I could have sworn it had more than two terms edit: Nope, that's right. [math]{v_f}^2={v_0}^2+2a{\Delta}x[/math]

What's wrong with letting the religious people be religious?