On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 19:09:27 -0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Bruce Farquhar
wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:50:29 -0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Bruce Farquhar
wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:33:33 -0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Bruce Farquhar
wrote:

Yet you think a nuclear station has never gone wrong.

I have never said this.

I said "We do have nuclear power stations which can and do explode....."
You said "Wrong."

What was wrong was your implication that they does this often and on a
regular basis.

I said "can and do" - that doesn't mean "often".

Tell the Japanese it wasn't a problem. Why do you think it's ok if no
injuries or deaths occur?

Because it already tells us a lot.

So if my car crashed due to a fault and didn't hurt me, that would be ok for
me to have to pay out £1000s for repairs?

In the case of Fukushima, repairs to what?

So you think no damage was caused? Do I really have to google it for you?

What damage was directly caused by the Fukushima Nuclear Power Station?

See Clare's reply to you, I can't be bothered teaching the ignorant.

What about future cancers to those nearby?

Who says there will be any?

Everyone.

You mean over and above background?

Clearly.

So who says and how many. There again, it depends what we mean by
background. Most of the evacuated zone was less radioactive than
Dartmoor.

What about the damage to wildlife?

What damage to wildlife?

Radiation will do that.

As it has been doing since the dawn of time. You are perhaps unaware
that, every second, some 4,000 disintegrations of radioactive nuclei
take place in your body - and mine, and everyone else's. And the body
has mechanism for repairing the damage, which are at work all day every
day.

And the presence of these radioactive atoms has nothing to do with
nuclear power stations or bomb tests. Or Chernobyl.

Go into the restricted zone at Chernobyl without any protection then
report back.

We could ask the people who live there.

Thy don't live in the restricted part.