John Oliver set straight by a real Nuclear Scientist

[Vyuvarax]

A lot of things back in the cold war era were dangerous to work with back then. Nobody even knew what they were working with. This isn't the 1950's anymore.

You're right. Nazis openly marching in the streets is 1930s-1940s.

[zenkai]

You don't exactly inoculate yourself to charges of political sniping. You try to dishonestly claim you're an independent with entirely conservative views and conservative criticisms of liberal figures couched in a thin "he's an idiot" wrapping paper with zero logic inside to defend your claim. You look like the worst kind of partisan troll - the kind too ashamed of their ideology to claim it.

The article is horrible. The onus is on the author to show how Oliver's piece is wrong. Simply claiming you are a scientist without providing evidence is the LEAST scientific argument one can make.

Glad to see a 238 poster knows so much about me, also you can look the guy up and verify his claim. But that would require thinking for yourself as I can see you do not make that your habit.

[Mihalik]

I'm very much pro nuclear energy, but John Oliver made a valid point (his piece was not again Nuclear energy whatsoever, it hasn't touched the subject at all, he specifically spoke about unsustainable mishandling of radioactive material).

The Forbes opinion piece/blog post, is laughable, it doesn't make any effort to refute any of the actual arguments made by Oliver.

I found the 70k tons will barely fill a landfill quip especially funny, considering that we are talking about a material which has harmful effects even if present in the microgram range.

[Molis]

This genuinely reads like a satire of people who say things like "smoking can be healthy" or "crude oil is good for the feathers!"

Too much red wine will help your heart.


Nuclear waste is dangerous, and should be treated with care.
If this scientist thinks it is so safe let him store some in his basement.

Oliver might exaggerate for the luls, but nothing he said was off base enough to say he is "wrong".

[Saucexorzski]

I'm very much pro nuclear energy, but John Oliver made a valid point (his piece was not again Nuclear energy whatsoever, it hasn't touched the subject at all, he specifically spoke about unsustainable mishandling of radioactive material).

The Forbes opinion piece/blog post, is laughable, it doesn't make any effort to refute any of the actual arguments made by Oliver.

I especially found the 70k tons will barely fill a landfill quip especially funny, considering that we are talking about a material which has harmful effects even if present in the microgram range.

There are nuclear reactor designs that could use that waste as fuel.

[NineSpine]

Glad to see a 238 poster knows so much about me, also you can look the guy up and verify his claim. But that would require thinking for yourself as I can see you do not make that your habit.

The moment you say it's someone else who has the responsibility for proving your claims is the moment you proved yourself disinterested in reality.

[Phookah]

Except you know that guy is full of shit considering we have literally dozens of reactor cooling pools across the entire country.

You know, the reactor cooling pools that's so full of densely compacted with nuclear waste that should say, a fire or earthquake or deliberate terrorist attack were to hit one, we'd be looking a radiation storm about the size of New Jersey that would kill an estimated 8 million people.

Not to mention that we have better methods of long term storage that don't have the chance of killing millions of people in nuclear firestorm, but the government likes to pretend it isn't much of a problem because you know, money.

Sounds like the guy who tried to tell John Oliver off wouldn't know enough science to make a paper mache volcano.

^ Again to anyone who thinks nuclear waste is safe, or being safely stored.

This isn't about nuclear power itself, its about the shitty storage of the waste product.

[Dug]

Well if we have to take such gigantic measures to "make it safe" when compared to other energy sources, isn't it an indicator that it's not all that safe in its original state?

I mean, if, let's say, most of humanity dies of some incredibly virulent disease only a scarce few are immune to. Let's say we're caught by surprised and decimated. Without human intervention, don't these reactors THEN become ticking timebombs compared to other energy sources? I know the scenario is as hypothetic as can be, but we've seen wilder things happen on this planet before.

I'd say its about weighing the pros and cons. Nuclear gives us massive amounts of energy relative to everything else and aside from nuclear waste there is no pollution. It's not easy nor cheap to dispose of the waste but I think it pays for itself if we fully embraced it along with renewable energy. Personally with all the failsafes they have I'm willing to take the chance. Obviously I don't want one in my backyard but we have enough infrastructure in our national power grid to now need them that close.

[zenkai]

The moment you say it's someone else who has the responsibility for proving your claims is the moment you proved yourself disinterested in reality.

Proving my claims? I posted my source, not my fault he doesn't want to believe it.

[Funky Kong]

You're right. Nazis openly marching in the streets is 1930s-1940s.

Not sure what point you're trying to make by invoking Godwin's law in a science topic.

[Phookah]

There are nuclear reactor designs that could use that waste as fuel.

Too bad our government likes money a lot more than your personal safety, so you can throw those out the window.

[Mihalik]

There are nuclear reactor designs that could use that waste as fuel.

Excellent. If that is the case then that is one possible solution to the issue. Once again, the point Oliver was making is that we aren't actually doing anything, we are just hoarding the problem and batting it down the line, leaving the problem to be dealt by someone else at some point.

And hopefully that point will come BEFORE some sort of major accident/incident.

[Dug]

Glad to see a 238 poster knows so much about me, also you can look the guy up and verify his claim. But that would require thinking for yourself as I can see you do not make that your habit.

I'm a 12,323 poster and agree with him, you're far from independent.

[NineSpine]

Proving my claims? I posted my source, not my fault he doesn't want to believe it.

Finding someone else on the internet that agrees with you isn't a source.

[Aquinan]

My opinion is right.

No, you're all butthurt because he makes fun of things you like I'd wager, it's satire and the point is sailing over your head obviously. Is the article even yours? You've seen one person disagree with him (And by the way provide 0 scientific evidence to back his side up), and just used it to rail against him.

[Molis]

I don't watch him, the couple I seen it wasn't even clever humor, he's an idiot.

OK that is fair. He is not for everybody.

Saying nuclear waste is safe is wrong on so many levels.

Am I trying to convince someone that vaccinations do not cause autism? Because thats the feeling I am getting.

[zenkai]

I'm a 12,323 poster and agree with him, you're far from independent.

If only I cared what your opinion is of me.

- - - Updated - - -

Finding someone else on the internet that agrees with you isn't a source.

You can't be this ....

[NineSpine]

If only I cared what your opinion is of me.

If you spent more time addressing counter arguments and less time being butthurt about people calling you out, less people would call you out.

[zenkai]

No, you're all butthurt because he makes fun of things you like I'd wager, it's satire and the point is sailing over your head obviously. Is the article even yours? You've seen one person disagree with him (And by the way provide 0 scientific evidence to back his side up), and just used it to rail against him.

Make fun of things I like, butt hurt? Please speak to me when you become an adult.

[Sormine]

Where's your faith in Scientists when it comes to climate change btw? Cherrypicking when you put your blind faith in groups sure makes you look Independent.

This needs to be repeated