• towerful@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    Pretty sure the fallout from Chernobyl was all the radioactive particles dispersed into the atmosphere by the initial explosion of reactor 4, and the subsequent fires of radioactive and contaminated materials.
    Literally a “dirty bomb” dispersing radioactive material, instead of the radioactive material being converted directly to energy

    • Forester@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yep uncontrolled meltdown and the fires carried the hot particles up into the stratosphere to disperse.

    • watson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s precisely what I said, with slightly different wording. But thanks for the additional detail.

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I mean, I guess? Kinda?

        You said you didn’t know the specific on the bombs dropped.
        Ok, so 0 information on the bomb dropped.

        But that Chernobyl created a massive cloud of fallout that impacted neighbouring countries and caused acid rain.
        Well, that’s true. But that wasn’t a fusion explosion.

        So, it felt like you were trying to relate 2 unrelated things. Like an apples-to-oranges situation.

        I feel that I clarified that the bombs dropped were designed to converted all fusable material to energy. They were literally designed to weaponise fusion.
        And that the fallout from Chernobyl wasn’t caused by material turning into energy (ie fusion), but from particle dispersion.

        So, I guess.
        In that you said you had 0 knowledge of Thing A, and stated an unrelated fact about Thing B. Where both things are true, and are related by the fact that nuclear fuel is involved. But that’s as far as the relationships go

        But everything you said after “yes” does nothing to support the “yes”

        • watson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          That’s a really long way to admit that I was right, and you just didn’t like my answer anyway.

          • Forester@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            With all respect no you were not correct.

            It’s two completely different scenarios with different transmission vectors and risks

            To put this in other terms you are conflating and misrepresenting facts either intentionally or unintentionally and it comes across as fear-mongering misinformation to those who have a more in depth grasp on radiology.

            You’re more likely to be exposed to cancer-causing levels of radiation from a coa firedl power plant than any detonated nuclear device.

            • towerful@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              Thank you for confirming I haven’t seriously misread something here.
              Felt like I was taking crazy pills for a second there!

            • watson@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              2 days ago

              With all respect

              You do not speak with respect. And, with all due respect, I’m not interested in having an argument. Have a nice day.

              • Forester@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Read a book or two on the subject matter please. There’s nothing to argue about. You are factually incorrect. I’m not being mean just explaining why you are incorrect and suggesting you enrich yourself.