BTGBullseye

Yup... Just today in a serious topic... Hey, remember when DOS was the pinnacle of operating systems?

You didn't grant the wish then... (your corruption violated a specific part of the wish, the "without any further damage to my body in any way" part) Granted, you are now dead from old age. I wish people would read everything that was posted everywhere BEFORE they replied, and that they wouldn't reply to something by taking it out of context.

Sometimes discusses stuff using facts instead of just blind opinion.

Which is a blatant lie. Yes, their dating methods are a lie. If we knew the atmospheric concentrations, and the original concentrations of the various elements they use for dating, then they could be fairly accurate, but neither of those are known. (not just C-14 dating, this includes all of their current dating methods) Resorting to a personal attack, or are you actually going to refute the argument?

Actually, there are reactors designed specifically to use 232... I can't remember if it enriches it to 233 before burning it, or if it just burns the 232... As for the unenriched Thorium reactor, it supposedly starts off with straight-up Thorium 232, (with a few other non-radioactive elements) enriches it to U233, then burns the 233, and just goes from there... Pretty neat process if I could ever find the article about it again. (I hate losing stuff on the internet, have to dig through massive piles of shit to hopefully find it again)

Banned for thinking that I don't have a plan to kill everyone I meet quickly if the need arises.

7/10 It was a joke...

Oh well.

Torrenting R.I.P.D. and retorrenting Iron Sky. Also cleaning up after breakfast.

Last I saw, Thorium reactors can't produce significant amounts of the volatile radioactive materials... Also, the Thorium reactors that I was seeing being designed didn't require any irradiation of the Thorium beforehand.

Everything doesn't almost not not maybe satisfy parts of me.

Banned for thinking I should fear my friends.

That slight amount of waste gets put right back into the reactor... No waste total. There are two major reasons you've never heard of a Thorium reactor never going critical... 1 - Thorium can never reach a reaction critical enough to cause meltdown. 2 - There aren't any currently operational Thorium reactors yet. (unless someone managed to get one going before it's scheduled start date)

"How YOU doin'?"

dO1rMeYnOmM -4qUXcXuMSE EwPRm5UMe1A

Well, I don't do fluffy games unless it involves making the fluffy go "BOOM!", but I don't hold it against people who do.

What dev, and what download? I might be able to tell you why they make it impossible to find.

About to go upstairs and make a pizza for breakfast.

Pizza.

Never said you did, it was just a min-rant against the "environmentalists" that are preventing decent power plants from being made. (the newest nuclear reactor is over 50 years old because of them) As for the safety of a nuke if something goes horribly wrong... Thorium reactors cannot go critical... Ever. Thorium reactors have no radioactive waste... At all.

I've used aimbots, and I've had lucky shots, so I personally don't call "aimbot" unless there are 3-4 awfully suspicious kills... Every time I do, all those suspicious kills either start happening to me, (definite aimbot, and the user doesn't care about people knowing) stop happening all together, (definite aimbot, and doesn't want to get caught) or continue. (most likely not an aimbot, just a really good aim) That said... I've seen way too many 'botters to want to bother playing. (I even know how to completely bypass VAC and all the server checks, and it's not that hard)

That's the Pascal's Wager! It is better to believe that God exists, then if you win you win a place in Paradise and if you lose - it doesn't matter, however, if you don't believe in God and lose - you go to Hell for a very long time... The trouble is what if you chose to believe on the basis of that rational argument and God really exists and he sees your mental calculations and disqualifies you for the opportunism? Don't use Pascal's Wager... God won't like it. From Wiki: "Anatomically modern humans appear from about 200,000 years ago and after 70,000 years ago (see Toba catastrophe theory) gradually marginalize the "archaic" varieties. Non-modern varieties of Homo are certain to have survived until after 30,000 years ago, and perhaps until as recent as 10,000 years ago. Which of these, if any, are included under the term "archaic human" is a matter of definition and varies among authors. Nonetheless, according to recent genetic studies, modern humans may have bred with "at least two groups" of ancient humans: Neanderthals and Denisovans.[3] Other studies have cast doubt on admixture being the source of the shared genetic markers between archaic and modern humans, pointing to an ancestral origin of the traits originating 500,000 to 800,000 years ago." But, of course, if the Universe is only 6 or 7 thousand years old this is all an illusion. Well, I can go into several aspects of how current dating methods are so corrupt that they can't get a true date on anything that wasn't observed and recorded when it actually was... I could also go into that stupid assumption that because the bible says that Adam & Eve were kicked out of the garden 6000 years ago, that it also means that the age of earth/the universe is the same... I think I'll let you decide what I should reply to first. That's why I qualified my earlier post(s) on that... After all, RE was not the most prominent part of the Soviet school curriculum and, quite frankly, I never bothered to investigate the subject in more details as I just don't see the need. Also, I live in the UK now and people here generally did nothing to correct my misconceptions. However, seeing as they historically view the Papists with some suspicions and disapproval, there may be a bias here as well Yeah, you've got two sides of bias pushing you to completely dismiss as untrue anything that doesn't meet their political agenda. (the king is the head of the church in the UK, and Russia has a history of controlling the religion with an iron fist) Where do you get that from? Isn't that the only logical conclusion? If the source seen as absolutely and infallibly true says "A" and your observations say "B", there follows that "B" is an illusion. Sometimes we just don't see how two seemingly conflicting sets of facts can be true at the same time. Doesn't mean either observation/fact is wrong, it just means we don't know HOW it works. That's the Pascal's Wager! It is better to believe that God exists, then if you win you win a place in Paradise and if you lose - it doesn't matter, however, if you don't believe in God and lose - you go to Hell for a very long time... The trouble is what if you chose to believe on the basis of that rational argument and God really exists and he sees your mental calculations and disqualifies you for the opportunism? This is why I choose to believe that if the christian god is the real one, he's a lot more reasonable than people make him out to be. I was actually raised catholic and took weekly classes over the course of, I dunno, 5 or so years at the church in our faith. I think it actually helped me with defining my own beliefs, taking some ideas and throwing out others until I found a system that I personally believe in and allows me to live the way I want to. The way I see it, if I'm going to hell because of my beliefs, then God is a jackass and doesn't deserve my love anyway. I won't know any of that until I'm dead, and my own beliefs gives me a different idea of what will happen after death, so what if I'm right? That's the thing about faith, it's all about what you choose to and choose not to believe. Changing the way the bible is written won't accomplish anything other than giving people yet another series of things to argue about. In fact, surely there are many people who would be fully against changing the translation, because they think that this version of the bible is the really real one. Again, it's all subjective and nothing's ever going to change that. And you have every right to believe that. Everybody has the right to believe what they believe, I'm just trying (hopefully) to provide a more accurate view of what the Catholic faith is. (there are so many misconceptions that even 90% of Catholics are wrong about what the faith's teachings actually are)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power It's clean, safe, relatively cheap, and all the "environmentalists" hate it. NUCLEAR POWER OF THIS TYPE WOULD BE THE ONLY PRACTICAL WAY TO RAPIDLY CHANGE TO A "GREEN" POWER SYSTEM!

6/10 I don't even...

"Why are you looking at me?"