Anon questions our energy sector - eviltoast
  • uis@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Something you had in there once shouldn’t be overly radioactive

    It still counts as radioactive waste. It was example of something regular people don’t associate radioactive waste with, but still counts as one.

    Something you had in there once shouldn’t be overly radioactive and the fact that it isn’t doesn’t say anything about the dangers of radioactive waste.

    “This waste shouldn’t be overly dangerous and the fact that it isn’t doesn’t say how dangerous it is”. Wow. How did you do this?

    What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the dangers of radioactive waste?

    Did you read what I write?

    I will rephrase you:

    What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the amount of radioactive waste?

    • Asetru@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      “This waste shouldn’t be overly dangerous and the fact that it isn’t doesn’t say how dangerous it is”. Wow. How did you do this?

      Here I thought you’re just slow and didn’t read what I wrote so I was already preparing to just explain what I said.

      What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the dangers of radioactive waste?

      Did you read what I write?

      I will rephrase you:

      What does that even mean? How is that saying anything about the amount of radioactive waste?

      This is where I realised you’re just trolling.