Devin

Do you think it is to that level anywhere yet? If so where? Where I'm from we have Chinatown, a Somali and Ethiopian village, and Indian neighborhoods, I love it, great variety of food and culture, Buddhist Temples, Synagogues, Muslim Temples, Catholic Cathedral all within walking distance, all open doors, it's heaven to me, we have different festivals celebrating different cultures.

How is catastrophic failure a testament for safety? Tsunamis are expected on the Japanese coast and they still didn't mitigate for it. Japan is possibly the most industrial conscious nation and they failed catastrophically, the failure mode happened to be much less devastating than Chernobyl, but that's like saying someone that caused a car accident is a safe driver because no one died in the accident, it was a completely foreseen vulnerability which they complacently dismissed. We know how to have safe reactors, the issue is cultural in that risk taking to save money is inherent in decision making. We have the know how, but we lack the discipline to implement it.

Most reactors online today were built pre-Chernobyl accident, and the recent Fukushima accident is one of the largest nuclear accidents in history in the most quality conscious nation. More complicated layers of safety do not change our culture of complacency, laziness, and corner cutting, which were the reason for both Fukushima and Chernobyl. Look at the recent plane failures or how driving is more dangerous than ever with the safest cars ever, more layers of safety give the impression of safety which results in even more complacency, look at the recent refineries that have blown up in the U.S.. Nuclear can and will be done safely, but we're dealing with humans and real logistical constraints. I think nuclear is great, but it's a loaded weapon and to be taken seriously as such. Bill Gates is working on a small remote reactor, I think that is a more viable path.

No one has died from green energy, I think you're being very dishonest. So now you can see even in your rhetoric, "Japan has built reactors within 4-5 years. What's stopping the US from building? Their own regulations." "can be pushed to work for even more than 40 years." This is the cultural ignorance that will push us to unsafely build and operate reactors, and ultimately have descendants that glow. Nuclear is definitely a viable energy source and can be done safely, but it's not going to be our main energy source for a long time. Green energy and energy reduction are much more practical stop-gaps. The bad thing is, when the climate gets harsher and harsher, nations will increase energy consumption to try to sustain their lifestyles, and the increase will be from fossil fuels, society is retarded, we need a green dictator.

Over ten thousand deaths are attributed to the use of nuclear energy, many more were afflicted with cancer, from operating only a few hundred globally. We need 20 thousand reactors to power the world, and in higher populated areas than they have ever been. For perspective, there are only 60 plants globally under construction, they take a decade to build, to get to 20 thousand anytime soon I think it would be reasonable to expect many catastrophic failures from the slap stick construction and operation that would be required. If production is doubled every ten years which is impossible, it would take 90 years to go all nuclear, and reactors only last 40 years.

That doesn't seem to be true at all. According to the official, internationally recognised death toll, just 31 people died as an immediate result of Chernobyl while the UN estimates that only 50 deaths can be directly attributed to the disaster. In 2005, it predicted a further 4,000 might eventually die as a result of the radiation exposure.Jul 25, 2019 https://www.bbc.com › article › 201... The true toll of the Chernobyl disaster - BBC National Institutes of Health (.gov) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov › pmc Mortality among the residents of the Three Mile Island accident area: 1979-1992. by EO Talbott · 2000 · Cited by 80 — Total mortality was significantly elevated for both men and women (SMRs = 109 and 118, respectively). Kyshtym disaster1957, September 29An improperly stored underground tank of high-level radioactive waste exploded. Death count unknown, estimates range from 50 to more than 9,000 disputedChernobyl disaster1986, April 26At least 78 are believed to have been directly killed by the disaster (31 due to the explosion, 28 due to radioactivity during cleanup, and an additional 19 for the same reason by 2004). [1][2] There are varying estimates of increased mortality over subsequent decades (see Deaths due to the disaster). 100+ (disputed)Windscale fire1957, October 8A 1988 UK government estimate stated that there would be around 100 deaths by 2007 as a result of exposure to radioactive material.[3][4] More recent academic research carried out in 2007 estimated that 100 to 240 deaths were caused by the radiation leak.[5][6][7] 1 (disputed)Fukushima nuclear disaster2011 MarchIn 2018, 1 cancer death of a man who worked at the plant at the time of the accident was attributed to radiation exposure by a Japanese government panel.[8][9] It has been suggested that 2,202 died as a result of the stresses of evacuation.[10] The overall death count as a result of the accident is disputed.[by whom?] 17Instituto Oncológico Nacional of Panama2000 August – 2001 MarchPatients receiving treatment for prostate cancer and cancer of the cervix receive lethal doses of radiation.[11][12] 10Soviet submarine K-431 reactor accident1985, August 10Reactor lid and control rods were lifted too far while adjusting position, resulting in criticality excursion. 49 people suffered radiation injuries.[15] 9Soviet submarine K-27 reactor accident1968, May 2483 people were injured due to uneven cooling of the reactor core, resulting in fuel element failures and multiple ruptures.[12] 8Soviet submarine K-19 reactor accident1961, July 4More than 30 people were over-exposed to radiation when the starboard reactor cooling system failed and the reactor temp rose uncontrollably. Emergency repairs ordered by the captain successfully cooled the reactor and avoided meltdown, but exposed the workers to high levels of radiation.[17] 5Lost radiation source, Baku, Azerbaijan, USSR1982, October 5A caesium-137 orphan source was carried by an individual in a clothes pocket, exposing several individuals. Five people suffered radiation burns and died; at least one other person suffered acute radiation sickness, and twelve others were exposed. [12] 3SL-1 accident (US Army)1961, January 3All three of the experimental reactor crew died when the reactor went prompt critical and the core explosively vaporized. 2Tokaimura nuclear accident, Japan1999, September 30Two fatalities, and six hundred sixty seven people suffered exposure. during a criticality accident at a fuel reprocessing facility, due to improper handling of liquid uranium fuel. [21] 2Meet Halfa, Qalyubiyya Governorate, Egypt2000 MayTwo fatalities, five injuries, and seventy six others treated for changes to their blood, due to an iridium-192 orphan source. [22] 1Mayapuri radiological accident, India2010 AprilEight hospitalized, with one fatality, from exposure to a cobalt-60 orphan source. [20] 1Daigo Fukuryū Maru1954, March 1Crewman of a Japanese fishing boat exposed to nuclear fallout from the Castle Bravo test. 1Louis Slotin1946, May 21Criticality accident at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico with same plutonium bomb core as the Daghlian accident, known as the "demon core". 1Harry Daghlian1945, August 21Criticality accident at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico with a plutonium bomb core, known as the "demon core". 1Cecil Kelley criticality accident1958, December 30Criticality accident at Los Alamos National Laboratory.[23] 1Wood River Junction, Rhode Island1964Operator error at nuclear facility while recovering highly enriched uranium; Robert Peabody died 49 hours later.

If I or you are compelled to make change in the world it's not because of a problem though, it's just continuing the performance. Being compelled to raise the collective consciousness is not a problem nor indicative of a problem in society, it is just the next part of the piece of music.

But is there really anything wrong with society? Envision It as perfect the way you think it should be, when I do I realize there's no ending in 'correction' and actually it would come back to the exact way society is now, I would eventually want society exactly as it is now, therefore to me it is already perfect. When you consider infinity, no end, infinite combinations; that means everything, every scenario will be. And I think infinity can even be seen logically, I don't mean in a philosophical sense; consider the time before the universe, then the universe happened, well if the universe can happen then obviously everything will happen, every scenario, I mean what would prevent it?

If people were as you want them right now, even then, wouldn't you still find fault with them? You speak of spirituality and of how people are searching for something outside themselves, but are you not as well by wanting people to be different? You would always be able to find 'fault', say you're God and you can change humanity however you want right now, envision that, sit with that vision a bit, would you never again come to see more 'faults' with your perfectly envisioned people? Wouldn't you eventually think, "awe, the stupid chaos was actually better, this is mindlessly boring". The knowledge of good and evil, fear, .... is probably the multiple choice answer to your question, but just as you reference in the end of your first paragraph, "it is because we as a whole humanity are not Spiritually minded that the problems we have exist, we are still living in Cave Man days, it is just we are not searching for fire, water, food, shelter, but entertainment, life and purpose outside of ourselves..." this 'problem' isn't outside yourself.

You're not even able to manipulate your body and mind.

People are like potatoes, one spoils the whole bunch, when you're around spoiled potatoes you'll only see spoiled potatoes, but there are great people and friends, not only that but when you find them they usually come in pre packaged bundles, you'll get even more great friends with the one you meet, great people seek each other out, so they're looking for you too. Being more social is essential, the club scene is rotten potatoes but most other types of social groups are full of great people. Most rotten potatoes aren't social, that's why they need the alcohol and loud music.

coed sports, meetups for coed sports, facebook groups for local sports(tennis, beach volleyball, or climbing partners), volunteering(facebook groups of your interest occasionally do volunteer projects, parks departments facebook pages, politics, petition signature gathering events, protests,..)

A lot of them are going to Jordan. Lebanon, and Syria.

Because they're allowing them and encouraging them to leave the country, it's a takeover, not genocide.

I like CeraVe or Cetaphil gentle cleansers, or a tiny bit of dove bar soap, once a day, rinse well. I alternate moisturizers, mainly CeraVe and Cetaphil, oils work well if you're not in a hurry, coconut oil, shea butter, all right after the shower before drying off.

I like Cerave, it goes on really nice and seems safe. I dread reapplying greasy or sticky ones. A stylish brimmed hat is probably the best.

Wow, I'm so sorry. I would post the problem on all the medical sites, reddit, etc. From exercise, lactic acid causes tightness, and lack of electrolytes or sugar causes fatigue and low mood. If I were to choose a test for myself besides every blood test, it would be to test for blood clots or heart problems.

Yes, go to college.

How would this help the U.S. destabilize Russia? Before this war Russia was largely accepted by the West, I'm not saying this point isn't valid though. The proximity for war does not seem relevant to me with modern warfare. If Ukraine was in NATO there would be no reason for NATO nukes in Ukraine, no nukes at all, even NATO bases. It would be too late for Putin to do anything then so I see why he would act now but again if these countries want to attack Russia, Ukraine is completely inconsequential with modern warfare. If Ukraine was NATO, why would NATO ever care about attacking Russia, it would require all 32 nations to vote in approval, to attack a nuclear superpower aligned with China. But yes I have heard Putin talk about Western expansion as a dangerous hegemony and I agree with him on that, I just believe his tact is completely backwards and of a previous century to attack countries, he needs to use diplomacy to be effective, tyranny is just digging him in a deeper hole even if he wins every state he attacks. The West is now going to destroy Russia financially, Russia is better off losing in Ukraine actually.

It seems completely nonsensical to me to think a 32 nation defensive alliance like NATO is an offensive threat to Russia. NATO is only a defensive alliance, it requires an attack for NATO to threaten anyone. It seems like a ridiculous concept because without NATO agreement those same countries plus every other non Russian influence neighbor can secretly conspire at anytime to cooperatively attack Russia, a country with half the nuclear warheads in the world.

Her as a person needs to be attractive to you, personality has a large part in attractiveness, and your standards for a partner should not be compromised , if you can compromise on them they're not really your standards.

What do you mean a double standard? Ukraine and Israel are Western allies, no one is claiming the West is supporting Ukraine out of the goodness of their heart, that's asinine to strawman the situation like that. Russia is the largest enemy, by Putin's choosing, of the West, Ukraine is an ally. Israel is an ally, Palestine is Iran adjacent, making them in the very least a neutral party. All this talk of being on the right side or whatever is juvenile narrativization. It seems completely irrelevant to me whether Putin wants to expand more, Ukraine has a right to defend it's own land, the idea that the U.K. is forcing them to war with Russia seems ludicrous to me, just before the war Biden announced that the attack wouldn't likely last long and that Russia would take the region. There was a map released by Russian media that accidently showed a planned operation in Moldova, which fits the m.o..

Putin has the Russian people to answer to, the war being brought to their house changes the conversation about liberating a rural village in Ukraine.

Please recommend books on modern politics. Please also share opinions on popular political books even if you don't recommend them.