Is it funny? Because generally for that to be funny, the account age would have to be linked somehow to credibility. I'm sure you are not stating that,because that would be incredibly stupid.
Please "brake it to me" more. Explain how everyone thinks that. Maybe some study? Some survey? Explain it to me and then explain why I hell would I care? You have no idea how dumb you seem right now. Like some flat earth dumbass explaining how wrong everybody else is.
I tried to use it to follow people in crypto but even many of those who stayed are now retweeting right wing conspiracy theories and anti science articles.
Twitter is a disgusting hole of hate.
Another person with the incredible wisdom to tell me the is no sun during the night.
Thank you sir!
I'll make it quick:
Reducing carbon emissions is urgent. Building nuclear plants takes time, is expensive. There is no capacity to build enough to offset any carbon, not to mention building them produces carbon emissions. Plus many are even scheduled to be closed.
Building something that will make a difference 20 years from now is smart, but if it comes at the expense of what is urgent today, it is very very dumb.
I watch her videos, but I'm pretty sure she didn't say that. I remember the conclusion was that is expensive, not renewable, new nuclear tech is even more expensive and nobody wants it next door.
We need to reduce carbon immediately, but there is no way to build enough nuclear plants to even make a dent into the carbon emissions we produce. Not to mention many reactors are even scheduled to close.
So sure let's have the conversation and let's plan to build but not at the expense of what is urgent now.
That's just how it is. Unfortunately most people have absolutely no understanding of that and just split between nuclear power bros and anti nuclear vegans.
Nuclear is good only for regions where there is no possibility to build wind and solar. In such regions/countries the government has to step in, take the loss and build nuclear.
It is not the only source like that at all. It is way easier, cheaper, faster and sustainable to build windmills where the is constant wind, solar cells where there is a lot of sun, hydro where there is... Energy sources should be built depending on the locality so they complement each other.
This kind of talking in absolutes like some of you are doing is just plain wrong and it does disservice to advocacy for nuclear power.
That's an oversimplification to the point that it is wrong.
Nuclear power is not the only form of clean energy like that at all. It can not be scaled in this situation to save us, because it takes too long to build them.
The next days will show how strategic it really is and what Russians will do to recapture it. They might go all in on it.
I don't believe this is the single moment where the front breaks. I hope I'm wrong
Isn't he the guy who had some childish alt right anti feminist rants on which he tried to become a politician only to embarrass himself to the point he became a caricature?
For me it was the brain dead disgusting coments they make about Ukraine and the war.