Debunking the Thorium Reactor fantasy?

[Stephen Morgan]

It is pretty sad how you can only ever attempt an argument by putting words in other peoples mouths.

You said that in the other thread when I pointed out that you vociferously deny any alternative energy to oil burning,

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

Where do i deny any alternative to oil burning?

Well, you've previously claimed that geothermal is impractical, the hydroelectric can't be done because there aren't any rivers left, that solar can't take over because of toxic byproducts and allegedly low take-up rates, that vehicles can only be powered by oil because only elitist liberal prius owners can have portable power, and now that Thorium can't be used because it isn't used now. So tell me, what alternatives to oil burning would you accept, when you've already dismissed out of hand all of the leading contenders?

thereby attributing the survival of our civilisation to the beneficent largesse of big oil.

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

And, look, here you are once again simply arguing against anything which might compete with oil or your apocalyptic post-Peak-Oil wet dreams.

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

You could probably have just said that once, I'm sure we'd have got the message. Especially as what you were replying to amounted to one statement. I suppose that's analogous to your approach to energy: keep doing the same thing endlessly and hope for the best.

So, in other words, you still haven't actually got an argument?

Oh i have a great argument against thorium reactors:
there are none.

Yep, no-one's built one yet. You know what else has never happened? Us running out of oil. Or, for that matter, any other natural resource.

[Nordic]

Hey SM, the reason some people -- to your mind -- "dismiss" such things is because to make some kind of transition from what we have now, to what we don't have yet, is basically impossible.

You really think that we can just make some kind of switch to solar and geothermal and hydro power without there being an apocalyptic level of tumult, catastrophic shifts in population densities and distribution systems, and the like?

Right, all those cars on the road can just go to the shop, and in 24 hours be equipped to run on solar power!

Wish I lived in your world. Sadly your world only exists in your head.

And you then decide (again in your head) that those who are facing reality are instead buying into some kind of Oilman's wet dream. That's just pathological. And you don't even see it!

Those of us who realize just how addicted our society is, and how damn near impossible it is to wean ourselves off the oil teat without MASSIVE and painful and quite likely fatal (for a lot of people) withdrawals are most certainly NOT beholden to the Big OIl fantasy.

In other words: You have it ass-backwards.

You're like someone married to a heroin addict who thinks their spouse should be able to simply make a little switch over to codiene cough syrup and be A-OK.

[Stephen Morgan]

Hey SM, the reason some people -- to your mind -- "dismiss" such things is because to make some kind of transition from what we have now, to what we don't have yet, is basically impossible.

That's just what wintler was claiming not to have claimed. I disagree with you, incidentally.

You really think that we can just make some kind of switch to solar and geothermal and hydro power without there being an apocalyptic level of tumult, catastrophic shifts in population densities and distribution systems, and the like?

Er... yes. Within the last hundred years we've created the entire electricity transmission infrastructure in this country, standardised it (which required a large amount of refitting), and switched from a coal-based production system to one split more or less equally between nuclear, coal and natural gas, with some other bits. There have been similar developments in road building, petrol infrastructure, rail electrification, the total from-scratch rebuilding of all cargo ports the world over for container shipping and so on. So, not only can we do it, it won't even be problematic if we get our fingers out.

Right, all those cars on the road can just go to the shop, and in 24 hours be equipped to run on solar power!

I think oil depletion will take longer than twenty four hours, but technology already exists for cars with ranges of hundreds of miles at current normal speeds powered by batteries, obviously a car doesn't have enough surface area to power through solar cells.

Wish I lived in your world. Sadly your world only exists in your head.

And you then decide (again in your head) that those who are facing reality are instead buying into some kind of Oilman's wet dream. That's just pathological. And you don't even see it!

You merely prefer to believe we will all die a slow and awful death without the ever-flowing teat of the oilman. I don't know how you can not notice the cock you're sucking. I suppose you must have decided those things somewhere other than "in your head", perhaps in the head of the propagandists you listen to.

Those of us who realize just how addicted our society is, and how damn near impossible it is to wean ourselves off the oil teat without MASSIVE and painful and quite likely fatal (for a lot of people) withdrawals are most certainly NOT beholden to the Big OIl fantasy.

In other words: You have it ass-backwards.

You're living in a dream-world, a dream world for the oilist and a nightmare world for the rest of us, and one unconnected to reality.

At least you're relatively up front about your oilpocalyptic ideas, mind, unlike wintler.

You're like someone married to a heroin addict who thinks their spouse should be able to simply make a little switch over to codiene cough syrup and be A-OK.

No prospect of heroin running out soon, either.

[wintler2]

Well, you've previously claimed that geothermal is impractical,

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

the hydroelectric can't be done because there aren't any rivers left

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

that solar can't take over because of toxic byproducts and allegedly low take-up rates

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

that vehicles can only be powered by oil because only elitist liberal prius owners can have portable power

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

and now that Thorium can't be used because it isn't used now

Another lie from a bulk supplier.
I don't never said it can't be used, i say it is irrelevant to our interests because there is absolutely no sign of it reaching sufficient scale in our lifetimes.

So tell me, what alternatives to oil burning would you accept

Wrong thread.

you've already dismissed out of hand all of the leading contenders?

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

You could probably have just said that once, I'm sure we'd have got the message. Especially as what you were replying to amounted to one statement.

You've proved yourelf very willing to pack many lies into one sentance.
Heres a tip for you, einstein: when you want to rebut what you think i'm saying, quote me. Seriously, find the words i've written that you disagree with, hit that quote button (bottom right), and away you go.

Of course you know that already, but you never do quote me, because you're only after attention, not dialogue. Get a pet, maybe a goldfish, something you can relate to.

I suppose that's analogous to your approach to energy: keep doing the same thing endlessly and hope for the best.

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

So, in other words, you still haven't actually got an argument?

Oh i have a great argument against thorium reactors:
there are none.

Yep, no-one's built one yet. You know what else has never happened? Us running out of oil. Or, for that matter, any other natural resource.

[Stephen Morgan]

You know they sell cod in my local shop, and sperm whales are still out there, it just so happens that their oil has been outcompeted by new products. And you know what? There never was a period when our civilisation was plunged into crisis by a lack of whale oil: we moved onto the new technology quite quickly and easily. Sorry if that upsets you by questioning your apocalyptic fantasies.

As for the rest, I quote you and you ignore it, I address issues you have raised and you claim it's off topic, and throw insults around. You've not worth talking at. Anyone who's been paying attention know the truth anyway, anyone else can go back to the relevant threads and see.

[wintler2]

.. your apocalyptic fantasies.

Another lie from a bulk supplier.

As for the rest, I quote you and you ignore it,

I ignore you when you're offtopic and not smearing me.

I address issues you have raised and you claim it's off topic,

Where?

and throw insults around.

I know, undermining my own arguments. But you have a long track record of bad faith and deserve every insult you get.

You've not worth talking at. Anyone who's been paying attention know the truth anyway, anyone else can go back to the relevant threads and see.

Yep, they can.

I'd be very happy to ignore you entirely, but you insist on smearing me, naming me & misrepresenting my views & dragging me into your little shitpit, just like dreams end used to do.

Stop smearing me and i'd be very very glad to ignore your turgid 'look at me look at me' posts.

[Stephen Morgan]

As for the rest, I quote you and you ignore it,

I ignore you when you're offtopic and not smearing me.

You quite clearly take every post I make as an opportunity to attack me, you're psychotically aggressive. Look at this very thread, I didn't smear you, didn't even mention you, but as always you saw one of my posts and felt the need to pile on.

I address issues you have raised and you claim it's off topic,

Where?

"Wrong thread."

[Hammer of Los]

I'd be very happy to ignore you entirely, but you insist on smearing me, naming me & misrepresenting my views & dragging me into your little shitpit, just like someone else used to do.

Stop smearing me and i'd be very very glad to ignore your turgid 'look at me look at me' posts.

Stephen, I wish you would ignore Wintler2's posts. I think you waste your time in addressing him. He breaks the board rules constantly by accusing others of posting in bad faith, and by using abusive language.

Look at this very thread, I didn't smear you, didn't even mention you, but as always you saw one of my posts and felt the need to pile on.

No-one can argue with that. Wintler2 smeared Stephen out of the blue on this thread and then accused Stephen of being the one doing the smearing. Check page one man;

Nothing to argue with. Asserting that it shall never be isn't something I can argue with.

Typical weasel words from the religious zealot.

-

For the adults in the room: there are currently no thorium reactors producing electricity for public consumption. And there never have been.

There might be, one day maybe, but its on the same list as flying cars, electricity too cheap to meter, and the second coming of the african jew some call christ.

Maybe he will accuse me of being a Koch propagandist, and a troll, and of posting in bad faith, like he has before. He might add the charge of sockpuppeting, since if more than one poster disagrees with Wintler2, they must all be one individual's sockpuppet.

Oh, and er Thorium? I know nothing about it.



ps And mentioning the name of the former forum poster who should not be named was very sneaky and underhand, I think.

[wintler2]

You quite clearly take every post I make as an opportunity to attack me, you're psychotically aggressive.

Another lie, there is endless nonsense you have posted that i've ignored, the misogyny being prime example, your pro-exploitation post on thisthread a more current one.

Look at this very thread, I didn't smear you, didn't even mention you, but as always you saw one of my posts and felt the need to pile on.

"Pile on" ?! Yes, i joined Nordic in disagreeing with your ignorant assertions, isn't that shocking of me. But two don't make a pile.

I address issues you have raised and you claim it's off topic,

Where?

"Wrong thread."[/quote]
You mean my dismissal of your attempt to drag oil into a thread on thorium? Think real hard, ask a friend, or an aquaintance in the street, maybe they can help you work out why.

[Hammer of Los]

Those of us who realize just how addicted our society is, and how damn near impossible it is to wean ourselves off the oil teat without MASSIVE and painful and quite likely fatal (for a lot of people) withdrawals are most certainly NOT beholden to the Big OIl fantasy.

(T)o make some kind of transition from what we have now, to what we don't have yet, is basically impossible.

Change from what we have to what we don't yet have is impossible? You don't think change is possible?! The only certainty is change.

So we are totally dependant on oil, our way of life needs that oil, we need that oil to stave off the catastrophe that is not having oil. There are no alternatives. I don't buy all that. There are alternatives and we have at least twenty years before shortages produce anything like catastrophic price shocks. I say we plan for the end of oil now while we can, and invest heavily in exactly those renewable and clean alternative programs a lot of folk seem to be telling me won't help at all.

If that won't help us avoid your apocalypse, then what will? Can nothing help us avoid it? Is it simply inevitable?

I'm just off to buy some canned food.

[wintler2]

Notice how HoL has joined Morgan in trying to make this thread about oil, and is, like morgan, trying to portray nordic as pro-apocalypse.

Get used to it Nordic, once these guys get going, they'll hound you for months.

[Sounder]

Yeah, that HoL, he's a regular hound from hell.

[Hammer of Los]

Notice how HoL has joined Morgan in trying to make this thread about oil, and is, like morgan, trying to portray nordic as pro-apocalypse.

Get used to it Nordic, once these guys get going, they'll hound you for months.

Yes, they are either sockpuppets or coordinating their attacks via pm. Watch out nordic you are going to be gamed by the ARG players.* They have clearly chosen the deceitful and totally lying tactic of accusing nordic of being pro apocalypse. Well, I didnt. I didn't say he was pro apocalypse. I admit Stephen chose his words very badly and was very mean to my friend nordic in regard of the use of certain phrases. Was it in another thread? He was being very impolite, and quite clearly and understandably nordic was offended. So, I'm chiding stephen. I didn't like the use of the phrase "wet dream," and I think the word "salivating" may have been used at one point. It was kind of funny, but also very unfair on nordic, who I have no doubt is no more pro apocalypse of any kind than I am.

Lets see. I am not making this thread about oil, I was quoting and responding to nordic, not to wintler2. So blame nordic for making it about oil. I have no problems with what nordic said in terms of being on or off topic;

Those of us who realize just how addicted our society is, and how damn near impossible it is to wean ourselves off the oil teat without MASSIVE and painful and quite likely fatal (for a lot of people) withdrawals are most certainly NOT beholden to the Big OIl fantasy.

(T)o make some kind of transition from what we have now, to what we don't have yet, is basically impossible.

Change from what we have to what we don't yet have is impossible? You don't think change is possible?! The only certainty is change.

So we are totally dependant on oil, our way of life needs that oil, we need that oil to stave off the catastrophe that is not having oil. There are no alternatives. I don't buy all that. There are alternatives and we have at least twenty years before shortages produce anything like catastrophic price shocks. I say we plan for the end of oil now while we can, and invest heavily in exactly those renewable and clean alternative programs a lot of folk seem to be telling me won't help at all.

If that won't help us avoid your apocalypse, then what will? Can nothing help us avoid it? Is it simply inevitable?

I'm just off to buy some canned food.

In retrospect, I am sorry as well about the canned food remark. It was unnecessary and ridiculing. Truly, I am sorry Nordic, I really am ignorant and stupid. But I would never hound you, nor anyone else. I'm not even talking to wintler2, you might have noticed.

But are we going to have some more of this?

Notice how Sounder seems to quite like HoL. Hmmm. Suspicious, don't you think, that they are all tag teaming wintler2?

* I have a suspicion, nothing more, that poor wintler2 is suffering from a little too much paranoia, and firm convictions about other posters' sinister hidden motives, posting disinformation and such things. I know, I shouldn't speculate on why he posts the way he does. I'll be honest, I often have simply no idea why some posters might post some of the things they do. I try not to worry about it. I just try and understand the words as they are in front of me. It's been said before recently and it very much bears repeating that often people imagine many things about other posters, for which they have no evidence, other than in their overly suspicious minds. It ought to be clear that I speak as a self acknowledged sufferer of same, see start of sentence. I am sure if wintler2 knocked it off with the witch hunt thing, he could be a very valuable contributor here. I hope no-one is offended by anything I have said, and I wish only goodwill to all here in our mutual quest for understanding. I also support the board rules that no one is allowed to accuse other posters of posting in bad faith, and that posters must not verbally abuse other posters. I know some people break Jeff's rules all the time, but I really don't like it. It is highly disruptive, and that's a fact.

[Stephen Morgan]

Stephen, I wish you would ignore Wintler2's posts. I think you waste your time in addressing him.

I dare say you're right. I just have a problem with resisting provocation. Like this bloke:



The little one.

Maybe he will accuse me of being a Koch propagandist, and a troll, and of posting in bad faith, like he has before. He might add the charge of sockpuppeting, since if more than one poster disagrees with Wintler2, they must all be one individual's sockpuppet.

Oh, and er Thorium? I know nothing about it.

It's a radioactive material which produces uranium-233 capable of being used in nuclear fission. Thorium itself is safer to store and produce than uranium, and the uranium produced would be consumed immediately, drastically reducing the amount of spent radioactive waste needing reprocessing to be turned back into fuel (or dumping), and thorium is very common making for a much cheaper fuel than uranium.

[Stephen Morgan]

You know, for a Hammer you're very soft.