On 27 Feb 2021 11:14:00 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 25 Feb 2021 at 16:04:40 GMT, T i m wrote:

That 'damage radius' could be extended to say a couple of thousand
miles or more, if any toxin / pollutant could be carried by the wind
and then settles or washed down onto the ground below.

Now, when that's Sahara sand or volcanic ash or even frogs, the
chances are few are doing to suffer much from it. If it's (say)
radioactive, a few hundred farmers may not be allowed to sell a few
thousand sheep or worse.

Except that such precautions are, in fact, unlikely to be necessary.

'Precautions'. WTF are you talking about?

They are
only taken because the relevant government (made up from people without proper
training in things like risk assessment) feel they have to be seen be "doing
something",

Bwhaha ... you think those people make such decisions .... bwahaha,

and feel pressured by the media and egged on by twerps like you,
who lack judgement.

Yeah, right. You sad, deluded goblin.

Ah! Todays sig looks to be made specially for you.

"Please stop telling us what you feel. Please stop telling us what
your intuition is. Your intuitive feelings are of no interest
whatsoever, and nor are mine. I don't give a bugger what you feel, or
what I feel. I want to know what the evidence shows." --
Richard Dawkins"

1) You don't seem to have the brains / imagination / intelligence to
come up with anything of your own.

2) Feelings have nothing to do with the irrefutable *FACT* that
anything that involves nuclear has the *potential* to do bad things
for a long time and over a large area. Full stop.

Were you a study of Mr Dawkins when he was looking for the ultimate
example of the existence of the Selfish Gene?


Cheers, T i m