lnx

Yeah, the left has fought against nuclear power, but you're suggesting there's some plot behind the TV series, perpetrated by "the left". That seems a little ridiculous. In any case, it's all pretty sad. The right don't "believe" in climate change, and the left are fighting against the best solution to it. Pretty sad to think that we've had the solution for decades, and just not used it.... and here we are. My hope about the series is that it'll get people interested in nuclear power, and perhaps get a little more enlightened about it. But as any series, they need it to be dramatic, and so they play on the usual fears. Might people be smart enough to see through that?

You think "the left" is behind this series, with an agenda to scare people away from nuclear? That seems a little conspiratorial, don't you think..? I hope the series doesn't have that effect, although I fear it might. Especially since nuclear seems to be our best bet in fighting climate change.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/ Another interesting take on nuclear power. I'd say the skepticism and heavy regulation was warranted a couple of decades ago - Chernobyl showed us what an accident at the early generation nuclear plants could do. Times have changed, however, and with climate change being one of the most pressing concerns of our time, nuclear seems like a very good option. Unfortunately it still has a very bad reputation.

http://xkcd.com/1732/ Some perspective on the rate of change of temperature, and a bit of amusing history.

Hah! Scuba's safe-ish, but I think the only two things I know of that are more dangerous than wingsuit proximity base are cave diving and surfing the tsunamis created by falling glaciers (Yes, that's actually a thing!) Well, that's why I said cavern diving. :) I haven't been there, but know several relatively inexperienced divers who have done it, without thinking it was particularly dangerous. Something to look into anyway.

They say cavern diving in Mexico is pretty nice.

Thus, my rejoinder is this: just because we can sometimes means we must simply because the times and circumstances require the action. I think perhaps Stanislav Petrov is worth a mention - the man some say single-handedly stopped WWIII. He was working at a Russian nuclear early-warning station, and chose not to report what his system indicated as 5 nuclear missiles heading into Russia. He correctly believed it was an error, and chose not to report to his superiors, who would be likely to launch a nuclear retaliation upon such a report. Perhaps a good thing he decided to not do so, even if he could...

It's an ordinary skydiver who drinks red bull.

True, only the first option is in line with IPCC, so it looks like 50/50 for now. I suppose I could have included some more specific options or change the wording of the existing ones... Maybe for another poll. =)

I am wondering if there's a 50/50 opinion here like debate I've seen suggests, or if small groups are being very loud... :) Feel free to elaborate with a reply, and I'm sure debate will follow.

Did anyone jump there? :) Is it possible? I might be going, and if I somehow can arrange for a jump there, I would very much like to do it. Any info would be appreciated!