If you want answers to everything that you just brought up, please reread this thread. I would further invite you to learn what the phrase ad hominem means, it doesn’t describe derisive comments about what you’ve written.

I highly doubt that it took you much effort to act this stupid. The idea that talking about nuclear reactors “going boom” doesn’t make sense when both the worst and the most recent nuclear meltdowns both featured explosions is just plain fucking stupid. Three Mile NOT going boom because of the controlled release that…

They become a factor every time you say something stupid about nuclear safety, so hopefully it’ll be less of a factor when you post in the future. I don’t give a shit whether you doubt the explanation I gave you, but in the future you should try to avoid claiming something doesnt make sense just because you dont know…

I think you’re confusing relevance with agreeableness. The idea that articles on containment structures and nuclear meltdowns aren’t relevant to the your flawed theories about nuclear safety is batshit crazy - regardless of how often they contain knowledge that you dont seem to have.

You DESPERATELY need to either read the links I gave you or talk to those experts you supposedly have access to. In the case of Three Mile the containment vessel allowed for a controlled release of radioactive gasses rather than an explosion - sealing in the gas until the pressure exceeded the design limits would have…

Containing steam strikes me as an excellent way to prevent steam explosions from demolishing a nuclear power plant, as I’ve pointed out to you before. Perhaps if you were better able to comprehend and remember what I’ve written I would lend more credence to your feelings.

Now I’m just seriously concerned about you. I’ve explictly and implicitly answered that question for you about half a dozen times and explained the specific way in which thermal cameras can help prevent steam explosions twice now. One more time, please feel free to take your time;

Why are you still trying to figure out “what kind of boom” I was referencing after I explictly told you the answer? My neurologist suggestion was because you were asking a question despite the answer being VERY recently provided to you, which suggests that you’re experiencing major problems retaining information.

Why on earth would elaborating on my initial statement and providing you the specifics of my original claim require me to make a trip to a neurologist? Perhaps your reading comprehension difficulties are cropping up again and you merely need to spend more time comparing those two quotes.

You should consult a neurologist about your memory problems.

Its really sad that youre still sticking to the idea that you're too lazy to explain how I’m wrong even in the face of your problems simply grasping the language we’re using in this thread. In that vein, I would like to point out that at no point was my statement limited to thermal cameras ability to “indicate an…

Every time I think youve turned a corner and are going to start posting things that display a firm grasp of the English language you toss up something like that garbage. Not only didnt I state that they “do nothing to prevent explosions,” I made the EXACT OPPOSITE argument in the immediately preceding post. Again;

Of course a lack of containment wouldnt cause a steam explosion/meltdown on its own, that's why I was careful to say that it was PART of the nuclear power plant safety effort rather then pretending that waving around a camera magically stops meltdowns/explosions from taking place. Thank you for admitting that proper…

Is that opinion from one of the nuclear engineers you have “access” to? I only ask because, if you look at the link I provided for you, in the United States they’re specifically designed to contain radioactive steam. The idea that a structure designed to contain steam would be completely ineffective at…

Yes, which is why Chernobyl is an excellent example of how improper containment can cause a nuclear power plant to explode. Had you simply responded with “nuclear power plant accidents don’t produce explosions” instead of acting like an idiot I would have been happy to link you to the worst nuclear power plant…

While “go boom” was intended to cover more than just audible clusterfucks, Chernobyl is an excellent example of how a nuclear power plant can “go boom” in an audible manner. Had you comprehended the link that I provided you regarding nuclear meltdowns you wouldn't have to ask that question.

Maybe you would be better off asking those friends of yours to grab some crayons and draw you a picture. Me explaining and linking you to the ability of thermal imaging to spot problems with the casing, the role of the casing in nuclear safety and a list of nuclear meltdowns seems to have been too difficult for you to…

I guess we can add missquoting to the list of things you dont understand. You see, when you post a quote like “to keep the reactors from going boom” and its not something that someone actually wrote/said, that’s called a misquote.

It doesn’t matter how precise my wording is if you can’t properly comprehend the English language. Your misquotes here have done an excellent job of highlighting the role your reading comprehension failures have played in your confusion here.

That’s definitely true, you clearly established your lazyness and demonstrated how difficult it is to educate an idiot. if you had ever looked at the links I posted you would have a great grasp on the role that thermal cameras play in nuclear safety.