this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
988 points (86.4% liked)

Science Memes

11253 readers
2993 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Na it's dumb. The issue with the magic rocks isn't the direct consequences like with the fire. The issues with these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah, the environmental issues that are orders of magnitude less problematic than literally pumping the toxic chemicals into the atmosphere like with fossil fuels, vs comparatively miniscule amount of solid waste to store inert.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Coal smoke is more radioactive than the outside of a fission reactor anyhow.

[–] moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 week ago

The comparison is dumb. The subject was the comparaison, and not what type of energy is better for the environment.

You're interpreting.

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

You bury them in concrete, done. Nuclear waste isn't an issue and hasn't ever been

[–] spirinolas@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, just bury it and make it someone else's problem in the future.

I've seen this train of thinking somewhere. Spoiler alert, it was a bad idea.

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

someone else's problem in the future

Nope, if you bury it in a few inches of concrete it's literally never a problem again unless society somehow completely collapsed and all knowledge of nuclear waste is lost

I've seen this train of thinking somewhere. Spoiler alert, it was a bad idea.

I've seen this level of confidence from people who don't know what they're talking about before. Spoiler alert, it's embarrassing for you

[–] spirinolas@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I've seen this level of confidence from people who don't know what they're talking about before. Spoiler alert, it's embarrassing for you

Ahahahahahah! Oh the irony! Drop the smugness.

Dude, you don't know as much about nuclear energy as you think. But you know even less about concrete.

if you bury it in a few inches of concrete it's literally never a problem again

I'm putting this one on Facebook for my civil engineer friends to laugh at. It's going to be a riot. Concrete is pourous as hell and doesn't last much on a grand scale. And on top of that you think a few inches is enough? This is nuclear waste, it's not Emma Dorothy from Sunday school!

Stop embarrassing yourself.

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Drop the smugness.

Nah, you want to start it when you're talking out your ass, imma keep it when I'm correcting you.

Dude, you don't know as much about nuclear energy as you think. But you know even less about concrete.

Oh wow, good scientific counterpoints! If only you could Google it and find out for yourself...

Stop embarrassing yourself

You really should, 5s in Google and I found exactly what I'm talking about:

I simplified with just using "concrete" because "they fill a container with inert gas and pour concrete around it and it's fine" is easily shortened to "dump concrete around it"

Shit, theres a YouTube video of someone kissing one of those, standing next to it for the whole video, nothing happens at all. You have no idea what you're talking about

Facebook

Oh, I see I'm dealing with a mental deficient here, I apologize for assuming you were of standard mental functionality

[–] spirinolas@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Dude, I'm not wasting my time correcting you. You made up your mind, keep the bike.

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Rather than learn and admit you were wrong you cower away and pretend it's because I'm wrong despite literally showing you what I was talking about

Be better

[–] spirinolas@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Sure, whatever. Have a nice day.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

What consequences?
There are no consequences for animals in Chernobyl, they are thriving in all aspects, even mammals living underground (mutations are fiction).

People that didn't leave the exclusion zone died of old age there.

Life on Earth had to deal with all sorts of radiation.

What caused mass extinction was ecosystem change, eg via global climate change.