Nuclear batteries.

Uranium is so Last Century - Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=287736
cuhulin

wrote in
:

> Uranium is so Last Century - Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke.
> http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=287736
> cuhulin
>
>
ROFL. Replace the natural world with the unnatural world. Thorium
doesn't exist in nature.




--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

jim > wrote in
:

>
>
> "E. Meyer" wrote:
>
>> On 4/14/10 11:34 AM, in article
>> , "jim"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> The attributions are getting messed up here. I was responding to
>> chuckcar's response to AZNomad where he stated:
>
> Ok, to be fair, everybody who said the US has no nuclear power was
> also incorrect..
>
>>
Yes, that was *you* AFAIK. Misunderstanding my post.

Message-ID: >

Your reply:

Message-ID: >

To a post where I talk about per capita usage and never mention
*anything* about lack or amount of US nuclear power. Nor did Mr. Meyer
ever state such.

If you can give me a message ID showing someone else stating the US
has no nuclear power is this thread who you replied to, I of course will
retract the above.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

In article >, chuckcar > wrote:
wrote in
:
>
>> Uranium is so Last Century - Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke.
>> http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=287736
>
>ROFL. Replace the natural world with the unnatural world. Thorium
>doesn't exist in nature.

Sorry, you must be thinking of one of the other popular radionuclides.
Thorium is very popular in nature; it's a big component of some of the
Florida sands. Handy for making gas mantles, vacuum tube filaments, etc.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in
:

> In article >, chuckcar
> > wrote:
wrote in
:
>>
>>> Uranium is so Last Century - Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke.
>>> http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=287736
>>
>>ROFL. Replace the natural world with the unnatural world. Thorium
>>doesn't exist in nature.
>
> Sorry, you must be thinking of one of the other popular radionuclides.

The word is element. Plutonium is one that doesn't exist outside of
being created by nuclear physics. Nothing after Uranium occurs
naturally. I was mistaken about the element number. U is 92 and Th is
90.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

chuckcar wrote:

> >
> > Ok, to be fair, everybody who said the US has no nuclear power was
> > also incorrect..
> >
> >>
> Yes, that was *you* AFAIK. Misunderstanding my post.

I never responded to a post of yours or said anything at all about you,
Anything you perceive to be a misunderstanding must due to be something
you hallucinated.


>
> Message-ID: >
>
> Your reply:
>
> Message-ID: >
>
> To a post where I talk about per capita usage and never mention
> *anything* about lack or amount of US nuclear power. Nor did Mr. Meyer
> ever state such.

Mr Meyer claimed the US had no nuclear power. He seemed to later claim
he was just echoing what someone else had already said as if that made
it somehow correct.



>
> If you can give me a message ID showing someone else stating the US
> has no nuclear power is this thread who you replied to, I of course will
> retract the above.
>

There are plenty of basic NNTP newsreaders available. Get one and try
to follow along.

-jim


> --
> (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

On 4/18/10 9:03 PM, in article ,
"jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> wrote:

>
>
> chuckcar wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Ok, to be fair, everybody who said the US has no nuclear power was
>>> also incorrect..
>>>
>>>>
>> Yes, that was *you* AFAIK. Misunderstanding my post.
>
> I never responded to a post of yours or said anything at all about you,
> Anything you perceive to be a misunderstanding must due to be something
> you hallucinated.
>
>
>>
>> Message-ID: >
>>
>> Your reply:
>>
>> Message-ID: >
>>
>> To a post where I talk about per capita usage and never mention
>> *anything* about lack or amount of US nuclear power. Nor did Mr. Meyer
>> ever state such.
>
> Mr Meyer claimed the US had no nuclear power. He seemed to later claim
> he was just echoing what someone else had already said as if that made
> it somehow correct.
>

Mr. Meyer did NOT claim there US had no nuclear power. As usual you clip
the actual thread, state a complete untruth, then start throwing around BS.

I copied the actual thread into my comments including my response, yet you
insist on picking a comment out of context and running with it. As this is
just one of many threads where you've done this, I can only conclude that
you are a troll.

>
>
>>
>> If you can give me a message ID showing someone else stating the US
>> has no nuclear power is this thread who you replied to, I of course will
>> retract the above.
>>
>
> There are plenty of basic NNTP newsreaders available. Get one and try
> to follow along.
>
> -jim
>
>
>> --
>> (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

"E. Meyer" wrote:

> >
> > Mr Meyer claimed the US had no nuclear power. He seemed to later claim
> > he was just echoing what someone else had already said as if that made
> > it somehow correct.
> >
>
> Mr. Meyer did NOT claim there US had no nuclear power. As usual you clip
> the actual thread, state a complete untruth, then start throwing around BS.
>

This was the the entire content of the statement you made to which I
responded:

[quote]

The reason the US doesn't have nuclear power now is
Three Mile Island. The panic after that resulted a
mountain of bureaucracy/red tape/expense that
has stopped nuclear power in its tracks.

[end quote]

I responded that the US has more nuclear power than any other country.


> I copied the actual thread into my comments including my response, yet you
> insist on picking a comment out of context and running with it.

I read the entire thread. Anyone else can too.


>As this is
> just one of many threads where you've done this, I can only conclude that
> you are a troll.

Are you requesting that, in the future, you be allowed to make false
statements without contradiction?

-jim


>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> If you can give me a message ID showing someone else stating the US
> >> has no nuclear power is this thread who you replied to, I of course will
> >> retract the above.
> >>
> >
> > There are plenty of basic NNTP newsreaders available. Get one and try
> > to follow along.
> >
> > -jim
> >
> >
> >> --
> >> (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

On 4/19/10 7:03 AM, in article ,
"jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> wrote:

>
>
> "E. Meyer" wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Mr Meyer claimed the US had no nuclear power. He seemed to later claim
>>> he was just echoing what someone else had already said as if that made
>>> it somehow correct.
>>>
>>
>> Mr. Meyer did NOT claim there US had no nuclear power. As usual you clip
>> the actual thread, state a complete untruth, then start throwing around BS.
>>
>
> This was the the entire content of the statement you made to which I
> responded:
>
> [quote]
>
> The reason the US doesn't have nuclear power now is
> Three Mile Island. The panic after that resulted a
> mountain of bureaucracy/red tape/expense that
> has stopped nuclear power in its tracks.
>
> [end quote]
>
> I responded that the US has more nuclear power than any other country.
>
>
>> I copied the actual thread into my comments including my response, yet you
>> insist on picking a comment out of context and running with it.
>
> I read the entire thread. Anyone else can too.
>
>
>> As this is
>> just one of many threads where you've done this, I can only conclude that
>> you are a troll.
>
> Are you requesting that, in the future, you be allowed to make false
> statements without contradiction?
>
> -jim
>

Hardly. I'm requesting that in the future you actually read what you are
responding to before you go of on totally false and unfounded tangents.

>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you can give me a message ID showing someone else stating the US
>>>> has no nuclear power is this thread who you replied to, I of course will
>>>> retract the above.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are plenty of basic NNTP newsreaders available. Get one and try
>>> to follow along.
>>>
>>> -jim
>>>
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

jim <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> wrote in
:

>
>
> chuckcar wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Ok, to be fair, everybody who said the US has no nuclear power was
>> > also incorrect..
>> >
>> >>
>> Yes, that was *you* AFAIK. Misunderstanding my post.
>
> I never responded to a post of yours or said anything at all
> about you,

Bull****. What the hell am I replying to?

In addition:

Message-ID: >
Message-ID: >

However I *did* find this post:

Message-ID: >

Ending with a Woosh (over your head) and no more posts from that
name. Curious.

Replying to a completely different nick. Who *absolutely* isn't you.

> Anything you perceive to be a misunderstanding must due to be
> something you hallucinated.
>>
No message ID's, no proof.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )