Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So it is, but not everything is so simple. If Russia stops supplying enriched uranium, plus if it persuades Kazakhstan, for example, i think then electricity prices in the United States will fly into space.
You presume that the world is operating at maximum uranium production capacity and that other nations wouldn't be able and highly interested in taking up the shortfall. Note that US uranium consumption was 40 million pounds in 2020 and has been steadily falling since using 62 million pounds in 2015. So clearly the world has capacity to produce much more.
Trump has always been Putin's stooge. That's why Putin didn't attack Ukraine when Trump was in office.
Yea - not buying it - Trump is no ones stooge and would never bend to Putin. Putin knew that Trump had a backbone and would not roll over if Putin attacked.
Your logic is deeply flawed - if Trump was Putin's stooge, would it not be a better time to attack with a stooge in office since could be counted on to protect him?
Yea - not buying it - Trump is no ones stooge and would never bend to Putin. Putin knew that Trump had a backbone and would not roll over if Putin attacked.
Your logic is deeply flawed - if Trump was Putin's stooge, would it not be a better time to attack with a stooge in office since could be counted on to protect him?
Trump had no backbone when it came to Putin. He admired him and still today he keeps praising him. He took his word over his own intelligence. You can't honestly think Putin was scared of Trump.
Well there it is. Lots of articles saying that many people were saying the same thing. Even if now the story has changed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia
Thanks. All those links point out how silly the other person was in saying "I don't know about nukes, but this scenario would play out if a bomb hits the biggest volcanoes all over the world. It has been said that the smoke would block out the sun and eventually all living creatures would die because no plants = no food." and there's no evidence anyone has any serious plans to nuke volcanoes.
Well at least you know now that I'm not the one that made up all that stuff. There was a show, and there were lots of people saying the same thing, according to these articles. But some say it isn't true. My opinion is that there is no real data proving it wouldn't cause an explosion of a volcano, but some article writers might want to act like they know something. Like you yourself might have meant, just because there's an article or show saying something, does not make it true.
Trump had no backbone when it came to Putin. He admired him and still today he keeps praising him. He took his word over his own intelligence. You can't honestly think Putin was scared of Trump.
Not even close to correct. I never said Putin was scared I said he knew that Trump had a backbone - do you always twist what others say to match your views.
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,060 posts, read 7,493,946 times
Reputation: 9787
My father, MD, participated in a medical society march (mid 70's or '80s ??) to the State Capital when the US Gov and State Gov Civil Defense, wanted to have the local medical establishments, put on a drill in the event of a nuclear war.
He had already participated in WW2 and interned in a major city hospital. He did public health service as a TB specialist, physician at flagship state university, and county medical before doing private practice.
The premise, of the march-Just what do you expect the surviving medical people do, when they don't have anything and the radiation affects are untreatable.
IOW, if you have anything more than 2nd degree burns, consider yourself lucky in the shortterm, but longterm its going to be a new society. IOW, You kiss your ass goodbye .
No, I did see it. And do remember that being said.
Well there it is. Lots of articles saying that many people were saying the same thing. Even if now the story has changed.
Well at least you know now that I'm not the one that made up all that stuff. There was a show, and there were lots of people saying the same thing, according to these articles. But some say it isn't true. My opinion is that there is no real data proving it wouldn't cause an explosion of a volcano, but some article writers might want to act like they know something. Like you yourself might have meant, just because there's an article or show saying something, does not make it true.
Huh? None of those links was to a show. And they all made a fool of your idea of bombing volcanoes, saying it would have little or no effect. You have a odd reasoning process, interpreting source after source saying it won't work as some kind of evidence that it might work.
Huh? None of those links was to a show. And they all made a fool of your idea of bombing volcanoes, saying it would have little or no effect. You have a odd reasoning process, interpreting source after source saying it won't work as some kind of evidence that it might work.
I read the links. They all said everyone was saying the same thing I did, but that " the author of the article", didn't think so. Then proceeded to explain why "they " thought it wouldn't work. Doesn't convince me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 
. 
.
