Everything's coming up Treehouse


You are not connected. Please login or register

Debate Thread

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 3 of 25]

51 A Little Bit About Nuclear Explosions on Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:51 pm

Samiam wrote:
Tuomey wrote:what'll happen if someone decides to blow up a nuclear power plant?

Surprisingly little. You do get the fissionable material for nuclear weapons from nuclear power production but its not in any kind of refined form inside the reactor to cause a nuclear explosion. You get a nuclear meltdown and another Chernobyl is what would most likely happen.

Tuomey's right on the money here. Your average nuclear weapons requires a core consistency of over 90% refined uranium. This is the reason why we're all so concerned about the Iraninan centrifuges, because they've got the capability to get close to this. Nuclear powerplants tend to be much less, hovering around numbers of less than 15% refined uranium or plutonium, and while this amount does increase over time (which is how you produce weapons-grade nuclear material in the first place (see Hanford)), even Soviet-era plants don't mushroom cloud.

Where the real pants-soiling factor lies is in the radioactive material blast. Chernobyl is the prime example, as the radioactive material from the internal core combined with the steam-cloud from the loss of coolant and went skywards damn fast. Chernobyl churned out plenty of material, remembering that one of the first indications we had of the accident were sensors in Scandinavia. Add to that the half-life of the material and you've got one helluva clean-up cost. This is why fuel-rods are so protected, as the main threat via terrorism from nuclear material is teh dirty-bomb scenario, with the spread of active alpha and beta radiation-emmitting particles that do all of their damage from the inside.

If you get the chance, pick up a copy of James W. Huston's book 'Fall-Out'. This deals with the idea of a military bombing strike taking place against a nuclear storage facility in California. It's also a damn good read.

View user profile

52 Re: Debate Thread on Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:15 pm

There is a lot of cultural changes as to how involved parents are. I've worked with some people who at age 20 are still very much attached to their parents will as to how long they can stay out. One girl had, at age 20, a curfew of 11pm, which was unbending.

My parents, on the other hand, sat me down on my 18th birthday and said that now that I was legally considered an adult by the state, that there would be a roof for me if I needed it and two square meals a day. Everything else was all in my court to deal with, but they would always back me in my life-decisions, just as long as I didn't turn up in a body-bag. Not really a major change, seeing as I survived six weeks by myself at age 16/17 when my parents and younger sister went to Europe. By age 20 I'd moved out, a point that I'd always intended to do at that age, and have had various adventures since then.

It does tend to vary on levels of maturity and responsibilty, but I'd probably pick the age for parents to really let their children make their own decisions at about 17/18. This is the age for voting in most Western countries, so it seems like a fair mark.

View user profile

53 Re: Debate Thread on Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:20 pm

my parents are pretty good about this stuff. my dad usually replies to me when i ask him if i can do something: "you're an adult you dont need my approval"
while my mother is quite the opposite.
there are things they dont allow me to do even though i am 19. but i understand those things and they are quite reasonable.
i know for a fact that my parents wouldn't mind if i drank in moderation. although i dont drink anyway.

View user profile

54 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:29 am

Tuomey

avatar
King Under The Bridge
Sweden weighs benefits of ditching cash.

Getting rid of cash is a good thing for the world.
Discuss.

View user profile

55 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Jul 17, 2010 8:28 am

Cash is just a symptom. If cash didn't exist, something else would be used in it's place. The benefit of cash is that because it is symbolic, it is something we can inflate to discourage a slumping economy which can occur when the rich are able to horde money/resources and not allow them to circulate. Also, without money, bartering for ones needs would be painful. Having to unload crops before they spoil but needing money later is a pain versus selling them immediately and the money being available for future trade. Could the world exist without such a system? What if everyone was guaranteed their needs without having to earn money? I don't know if people are responsible enough to work without money as a whole. Individually some are. Others need money to limit their wastefulness and to drive their productivity. I say money is necessary but how we view/use it could change.

View user profile

56 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Jul 24, 2010 3:13 pm

New topic: Religion. What religion are you, and why?


Personally, I am a deist. What that entails is believing that a god of some sort created the universe, then detached himself from it. The reasons being are that if there was a God, then I think he should show the fact he exists more. People blindly put their faith in something that could be entirely fabricated! I believe in the strength of human will, not faith in something else.

View user profile

57 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Jul 24, 2010 4:19 pm

I'm a Christian in theory and sometimes practice, and a Buddhist in my head.
Christian as in I'm a confirmed member of a Methodist church, and go there whenever possible, and on some months my family tithes 10 percent and all that(or as near as possible). I enjoy the company at church and I've read most of the bible, and I've participated in charitable acts via my youth group. I try to adopt a Buddhist outlook toward life because as near as I can tell it's the only way I'll ever achieve some peace. My father's a Buddhist and I adapt some of the things he's taught me into my life. I always try to do whatever makes sense to me, so I'm apt to change my views whenever I receive new information.

View user profile

58 Re: Debate Thread on Sun Jul 25, 2010 12:25 am

Gorgro

avatar
Glorious Leader
I'm a Catholic in the sense that i've been baptised and all that. I went to a catholic school until i was 15, but i only go to church for weddings or funerals now.

I'm something between an atheist and an agnostic in practice, i'm fairly scientific about everything like this, and there's just not enough evidence to support the existence of a creator, and even if there was one, it wouldn't be any of the ones humans have conjured up in the course of history. Those were all just ways of explaining things they didn't understand (nature, life and death,...) combined with parts of their every day life to make them more accessible. Then someone wrote a book and the religion became widespread because everyone, for whatever reason, believed everything it said. You may think it's normal now for people to be reading the Bible or the Quran and having their entire belief system based on it, but now compare this to Scientology today and L. Ron Hubbards Dianetics. Not to mention that people can't even get along within the same religion and just start their own branches. These things just don't give a lot of credibility to the whole institution.

View user profile http://treehouse.justforum.net

59 Re: Debate Thread on Sun Jul 25, 2010 3:51 am

Tuomey

avatar
King Under The Bridge
I was raised Catholic and pretty much every school in Ireland is a Catholic school and I don't believe at all in Christianity.
I do believe in the supernatural, and I'm unsure on the subject of God/Gods.
(Except Science God)

View user profile

60 Re: Debate Thread on Mon Jul 26, 2010 3:18 am

HollyŠÉ¶

avatar
Dove in the Moonlight
I was raised Christian, but I turned hardcore Buddhist. I can't separate myself from material goods, but I'm getting better in the practice. Soon to go on a spiritual retreat - should be fun fun fun.

View user profile

61 Re: Debate Thread on Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:09 am

I was born and raised in the "Mormon" religion. I believe my church is the real church, but, then again, so does everyone else.

View user profile

62 Re: Debate Thread on Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:16 am

Guest


Guest
I was baptised into the CoE, but I can only say I'm agnostic.
I believe the ideals of Feuerbach & Freud, and their Psychological Argument:
"What man needs, he makes his God. What man desires to be, he makes his God."
In summarisation, faith is something we have to make us feel Safe & Secure. I don't know about Heaven or Hell, but I do believe something significant does happen after death.

63 Re: Debate Thread on Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:35 am

I personally believe that there's a supreme being, but said being does affect us at all. Nothing that happens is "God's Will." That is to say, I believe that Those groups who try to say "This Should/shouldn't happen, because God does/doesn't want it to happen!" Are whackjobs who shouldn't hide behind God all the time.

View user profile

64 Re: Debate Thread on Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:25 am

Westboro Baptist Church anyone?

View user profile

65 Re: Debate Thread on Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:00 am

I've come to the conclusion that the WBC is what happens when you combine 9001% Attention Whores with 9001% Trolls using a cheaply made Combinotron.

View user profile

66 Re: Debate Thread on Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:14 am

I was raised (Roman) catholic,in a way that I did get 3 sacraments, but hardly ever went to church (sometimes at Christmas).

when I grew older I began thinking like Gorgro, until one day, I actually disproved the idea of god for myself (I am not telling hoe, since I partially forgot, and I don't wan't to press my ideas on other people. I am a strong supporter of the notion that people should think for themselves. This is also a problem I have with organised religion)

View user profile

67 Re: Debate Thread on Wed Jul 28, 2010 9:44 pm

I'm an athiest, perhaps because I was raised that way, but more likely because I have little to no faith in anything...
I'm not sure how or why the universe came into being, and frankly, I don't really care.
It's here now...
It's likely going to be here untill I die....
Thats what really matters to me..
I have no problem with any religion, because, hey, it's their life, and they're just as likely to be right as I am....
But, I just need proof sometimes...
And something as lifechanging as a religion needs proof, for me...
Ah well...
I'll find out, likely after me saying "Hey! Guys! Check this out! If you light this stuff on fire it burns reall-*boom* argh!"

View user profile

68 Re: Debate Thread on Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:32 pm

Tuomey

avatar
King Under The Bridge
Jonny Frink McBlastoise wrote: So, there's a big debate going on teh intarwebz regarding used games. It's being argued, quite rightly, that buying used games takes money away from developers and places it in the hands of the retailers. Which, I imagine, is KINDA BAD for the industry.

The problem I have is that people are inevitably going to sell games on. So, what are we meant to do with the games after they've been sold? Yes, money should go to the people who make the game in the first place, but it seems silly to throw away perfectly good games purely because someone else got to it first. Or am I missing something?

Another thing I was thinking about is buying games new but after they've been out for a while so they've come down in price a lot. I got de Blob new for 10 pounds. So...how much goes to the developer now?

Still, that game has a sequel in the works now, so it must have done alright. I kinda wish I'd gotten Zack and Wiki new, though: that game is amazing. On reflection I do get quite a few games new, or if I buy them used they've been out for a good long while anyway.

View user profile

69 Re: Debate Thread on Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:48 am

So would we rather discuss that or the Quar'an burning?

I read in the paper that the guy starting it met with an imam from NYC, and agreed not to burn the books if they didn't build a mosque too close to Ground Zero, despite the fact that as far as I know, the guy starting the burning had said before that it had nothing to do with the Ground Zero mosque, and now apparently it has to do with "So long as the mosque is moved from Ground Zero, the burning won't happen."
But if that confuses you, don't worry. Whether or not the Quar'an burning has anything to do with the Ground Zero mosque doesn't matter with this statement. Terry Jones, the guy who planned the book burning later said that the imam he had talked with was "Clearly, clearly lying." And the burning is only postponed.

My opinion on this is that it's going too far. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates personally called Jones in order to try and discourage him from doing this. Obama has indirectly told Jones that what he's doing isn't helping the United States' image, is making practically every Muslim in the world very displeased with him and his church, and I saw a picture in the paper of a group of Pakistani lawyers burning the American Flag in anger over this man threatening to burn their holy book.

And this is all because Terry Jones is a close minded bigot who decided to take things too far. Oh I'm not saying that those Pakistani lawyers probably weren't already prejudice against America, but now, in their minds, they have an excuse, a reason, to be doing this. Islamic extremists' recruiting will be that much easier because they can spin this into a story to gain sympathy with potential recruits

Seriously Terry Jones. CUT YOUR SHIT OUT.

So this or Jonny's issue?

View user profile

70 Re: Debate Thread on Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:56 am

Oh that. Terry Jones is giving a bad name to all of us with sacrilegious attitudes and pyromaniac tendencies.

View user profile

71 Re: Debate Thread on Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:01 am

Jonny

avatar
Prince of the Squirtle Squad
Boo. Hiss.

Seriously, though, it's pretty disrespectful right now. I don't believe in religion but many people do and it's important to respect other people's beliefs. This Koran burning is disrespectful and suggests that all Muslims are evil, which simply isn't true.

Regarding the "Ground Zero Mosque", though, I don't understand why it has to be Muslim. It isn't a mosque: it's an interfaith centre which also has sports facilities, stuff like that. To give it a religious bias seems somewhat inflammatory and insensitive. Yes, Muslims were killed in 9/11 and many Muslims condemned the act, yada yada. But the truth is the act was committed, if erroneously, in the name of Islam and that is still going to be a raw wound for many people.

View user profile

72 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:17 am

Here is one for debate,

What is worse getting in class.

A period or a boner?

/Discuss

View user profile

73 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:27 am

Jonny

avatar
Prince of the Squirtle Squad
A boner. Although as a boy I cannot comment on the other.

View user profile

74 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:28 am

Tuomey

avatar
King Under The Bridge
As a guy you can't raise your eyebrows, lean forward, put on a firm voice and say to the teacher "I need to go to the bathroom," and expect any serious effect.

View user profile

75 Re: Debate Thread on Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:09 am

Periods by far. At least us guys can learn strategic boner hiding techniques.

THANK YOU. AT LEAST YOU UNDERSTAND.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 25]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 25  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum