This post appears to show that they’re arguing that nuclear bombs “aren’t that bad”, as it’s missing the important context that they’re actually talking about the safety of nuclear power — or, rather, they’re arguing that nuclear power isn’t as dangerous as people might think — by using the lingering radiation from the nuclear bombings as an example.
I want to be clear that I’m not arguing that their argument is sound, but this post is bordering on disinformation.
ok… so that just shows they’re idiots.
And if that’s the case, one should explain why that is rather than trying to twist the truth to fit a narrative.
there was not much radiation because most of it was scattered EVERYWHERE. and the radioactive material was very shortlived. Chernobyl is still very hot, especially in the immediate surrounding areas and nothing like after being nuked as the radioactive material left behind is very long lived
I agree.
Perhaps he meant that it’s not as bad as some people think that nuclear bombs make areas uninhabitable for 1000 of years. I think a lot of people probably think that. Disregarding injuries and death
Boo
God makes no mistakes.
An all-knowing, all-powerful being is hard of hearing?
