Criticism of Artillery

Diabolical wrote:

I forgot to mention, the whole reason for using depleted uranium is for the weight. It is a heavy substitute for lead and there's an abundant supply left over from the nuclear plants. This is environmentalism at it's finest: recycling radioactive materials for the betterment of mankind...by killing the bad guys.

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

So does spills from nuclear power plants.

oceanhawk wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

So does spills from nuclear power plants.

and..?

@Diabolical

https://bible.org/seriespage/21-sin-stealing-exodus-2015

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

So does spills from nuclear power plants.

and..?

Should the UN ban nuclear power plants?

Also, Chemical weapons are already banned, as a result of these weapons causing chemical related illnesses etc to the local poplulation, as we have been discussing, they can come under the title of Chemical weapons, and will then be banned

oceanhawk wrote:

No, that would be an awful idea, then they would lack power. Nuclear energy is good, just cos I dont think wind etc is stable enough

oceanhawk wrote:

Also, Chemical weapons are already banned, as a result of these weapons causing chemical related illnesses etc to the local poplulation, as we have been discussing, they can come under the title of Chemical weapons, and will then be banned

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

No, that would be an awful idea, then they would lack power. Nuclear energy is good, just cos I dont think wind etc is stable enough

Same with DU, except instead of giving power, it is harder and heavier and is overall much better than, say, lead or tungsten.

oceanhawk wrote:

Also, Chemical weapons are already banned, as a result of these weapons causing chemical related illnesses etc to the local poplulation, as we have been discussing, they can come under the title of Chemical weapons, and will then be banned

They aren't chemical weapons......

oceanhawk wrote:

DU,is being considered for categorizing as a chemical weapon. Due to the fact they cause serious radioactive related illness to the local polulation

Quasi-duck wrote:

Diabolical wrote:

Ahem, I started this thread and I am not off topic so much as responding to someone else. That being said, the rules of topics should not be very rigid in a thread started by non-staff members.

And I don't think you read the post or else you wouldn't have been able to reply as quickly as you did. So for all you know, I did stay on topic -- or did I???

That is for the staff to decide. Nattering about Gawd is not staying on topic.

What do you think of arty getting a buff?

My whole point in this thread has been to fix the negative growth of Arties as they are researched to higher levels. Also to improve their performance against naval units...at least at higher levels. So, yes, I'm in favor of "buff", but only enough to make it feasible to use them, not enough to make Arties the next swarming unit (like building nothing but Level 1 light tanks for the first three weeks of gameplay...you know, that highly annoying zergling behavior).

oceanhawk wrote:

Diabolical wrote:

I forgot to mention, the whole reason for using depleted uranium is for the weight. It is a heavy substitute for lead and there's an abundant supply left over from the nuclear plants. This is environmentalism at it's finest: recycling radioactive materials for the betterment of mankind...by killing the bad guys.

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

Um, there's no real proof. They used to say the same about high voltage transmission power lines...the evidence of which was -- at best -- inconclusive and -- at worst -- totally fabricated and proven false.

oceanhawk wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

So does spills from nuclear power plants.

and..?

Should the UN ban nuclear power plants?

No, that would be an awful idea, then they would lack power. Nuclear energy is good, just cos I dont think wind etc is stable enough

Also, Chemical weapons are already banned, as a result of these weapons causing chemical related illnesses etc to the local poplulation, as we have been discussing, they can come under the title of Chemical weapons, and will then be banned

One beautiful benefit about nuclear power, it is supremely efficient and has a tiny footprint. And it's 99.99% safe. You can't say that about any other power source. More people die building OR maintaining wind farms each year than die from radiation-related diseases due to power plant failures. The one exception -- maybe -- is Chernobyl, which was poorly run by a fanatical communist state. Communists are terrible at nuclear safety.

Even the Three Mile Island incident was actually a textbook example of everything being done right when something went wrong. That's why it was a "scare" and not an actual disaster. And the incident in northern Japan was due to natural disaster and even they did everything right to mitigate the problems.

oceanhawk wrote:

DU,is being considered for categorizing as a chemical weapon. Due to the fact they cause serious radioactive related illness to the local polulation

Diabolical wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Diabolical wrote:

I forgot to mention, the whole reason for using depleted uranium is for the weight. It is a heavy substitute for lead and there's an abundant supply left over from the nuclear plants. This is environmentalism at it's finest: recycling radioactive materials for the betterment of mankind...by killing the bad guys.

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

Um, there's no real proof. They used to say the same about high voltage transmission power lines...the evidence of which was -- at best -- inconclusive and -- at worst -- totally fabricated and proven false.

oceanhawk wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes but also causing radioactive sickness to the local population...

So does spills from nuclear power plants.

and..?

Should the UN ban nuclear power plants?

No, that would be an awful idea, then they would lack power. Nuclear energy is good, just cos I dont think wind etc is stable enoughAlso, Chemical weapons are already banned, as a result of these weapons causing chemical related illnesses etc to the local poplulation, as we have been discussing, they can come under the title of Chemical weapons, and will then be banned

One beautiful benefit about nuclear power, it is supremely efficient and has a tiny footprint. And it's 99.99% safe. You can't say that about any other power source. More people die building OR maintaining wind farms each year than die from radiation-related diseases due to power plant failures. The one exception -- maybe -- is Chernobyl, which was poorly run by a fanatical communist state. Communists are terrible at nuclear safety.

Even the Three Mile Island incident was actually a textbook example of everything being done right when something went wrong. That's why it was a "scare" and not an actual disaster. And the incident in northern Japan was due to natural disaster and even they did everything right to mitigate the problems.

oceanhawk wrote:

DU,is being considered for categorizing as a chemical weapon. Due to the fact they cause serious radioactive related illness to the local polulation

DU only causes serous health problems to the enemy...when they get shot.

Dia saying something... that makes sense... what is this?

Yes Nuclear power is really a better solution than wind etc, Yes Id rather Wind and wave, but its just not capable, they simply cant work in great mass. Nuclear power is only real solution.

And you are 100% right, Chernobyl was cos of the commies, see the government there, didnt really care for human safety.

Japan, were wrong to build the plant there, I think they should have planned for this better, especially since they are on a fault line.

no, the radioactive material flies up into the atmosphere, and settles among the local population.

http://climateandcapitalism.com/2015/02/08/pentagon-pollution-5-deadly-impact-depleted-uranium/

just a quote from it,

Test data has shown that approximately 20 percent of a DU weapon penetrator becomes aerosolized particles upon impact with an armored vehicle. According to Army tests, a 120 millimeter DU penetrator, when fired from an Abrams tank, created two to seven pounds of uranium oxide dust upon impact. From 50-96 percent of the dust is respirable particles, the majority of which, if inhaled, can remain in the lungs for years. Some fraction of the aerosolized DU particles can be dispersed and spread by wind. A significant amount contaminates soil within a few hundred yards of the target but can be resuspended and carried distances in windy conditions.

oceanhawk wrote:

First off, there is proof, there is a huge surge in child mortality rates across areas such as Iraq, as a result of radiation like illnesses

But that's not concrete...radiation-like illnesses are just as likely from chemical contamination from Saddam's chemical tests. And people around the world are facing more and more cases of actual radiation-related genetic disorders because their parents or grandparents went on airplanes, sun-bathed too often, got x-rays without sufficient gonad protection, and/or did numerous other things that actually expose one to high-frequency wave radiation.

The effect of DU on the environment is paltry in comparison to the natural sources of radiation from the earth and from the sun and stars that occur everywhere. Some Uranium in the soil decays into Radium and Radium is always decaying into Radon in the earth near the surface. Those all contribute to radiation in our environment and the solar/stellar radiation is always penetrating the atmosphere.

Ionized particles in the air cause damage to your skin, eyes, lungs, and ENT cavities when breaking down while being absorbed. Magnetic radiation is everywhere and constantly bombarding us from power lines to the phones in your pockets. These are just samples of the numerous radiation sources that very slowly but surely damage you, inside and out. In fact, your entire life is a battle of your ability to repair your cells against the constant destruction of your cells by radiation. Ultimately, it's a losing battle...that's why you age. That's how the curse of death destroys you.

Your best way to extend your life -- cancer free -- is to live in an extremely thick ice cave at the north pole. Solar radiation would be reduced for half a year by the lack of sun exposure and the ice would filter out the rest. (water is a natural insulator against radiation, but it has to be much thicker than a concrete bunker. Of course, you'd still be absorbing the isotopes of decaying atoms even of the water and air, but you'd still live longer (a bit chilly, of course).

oceanhawk wrote:

Test data has shown that approximately 20 percent of a DU weapon penetrator becomes aerosolized particles upon impact with an armored vehicle. According to Army tests, a 120 millimeter DU penetrator, when fired from an Abrams tank, created two to seven pounds of uranium oxide dust upon impact. From 50-96 percent of the dust is respirable particles, the majority of which, if inhaled, can remain in the lungs for years. Some fraction of the aerosolized DU particles can be dispersed and spread by wind. A significant amount contaminates soil within a few hundred yards of the target but can be resuspended and carried distances in windy conditions.

This fails to take into account the vast quantitative differences between a tiny amount of aerosolized Uranium vs the entire atmosphere. The amount of contributed aerosolized uranium pales in comparison even when just compared to radiation from the stars in the sky. It is insufficient quantities to matter. Furthermore, "test data" is irrelevant without certifiable proof with long-term statistical analysis and an elimination of all other sources of radiation in the test sample (not possible since we have the constant bombardment of radiation from everything else.

Diabolical wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Test data has shown that approximately 20 percent of a DU weapon penetrator becomes aerosolized particles upon impact with an armored vehicle. According to Army tests, a 120 millimeter DU penetrator, when fired from an Abrams tank, created two to seven pounds of uranium oxide dust upon impact. From 50-96 percent of the dust is respirable particles, the majority of which, if inhaled, can remain in the lungs for years. Some fraction of the aerosolized DU particles can be dispersed and spread by wind. A significant amount contaminates soil within a few hundred yards of the target but can be resuspended and carried distances in windy conditions.

This fails to take into account the vast quantitative differences between a tiny amount of aerosolized Uranium vs the entire atmosphere. The amount of contributed aerosolized uranium pales in comparison even when just compared to radiation from the stars in the sky. It is insufficient quantities to matter. Furthermore, "test data" is irrelevant without certifiable proof with long-term statistical analysis and an elimination of all other sources of radiation in the test sample (not possible since we have the constant bombardment of radiation from everything else.

also, did you actually read the rest of the evidence? cos what ever you are saying is nonsense. There is a link between DU rounds fired, and related illnesses, that you mentioned above.

oceanhawk wrote:

highly doubt you are in the field, of Science, because you think the world was created in 7 days( every time I hear that, I just start laughing)

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

highly doubt you are in the field, of Science, because you think the world was created in 7 days( every time I hear that, I just start laughing)

What is your scientific field, eh?

oceanhawk wrote:

Diabolical wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Test data has shown that approximately 20 percent of a DU weapon penetrator becomes aerosolized particles upon impact with an armored vehicle. According to Army tests, a 120 millimeter DU penetrator, when fired from an Abrams tank, created two to seven pounds of uranium oxide dust upon impact. From 50-96 percent of the dust is respirable particles, the majority of which, if inhaled, can remain in the lungs for years. Some fraction of the aerosolized DU particles can be dispersed and spread by wind. A significant amount contaminates soil within a few hundred yards of the target but can be resuspended and carried distances in windy conditions.

This fails to take into account the vast quantitative differences between a tiny amount of aerosolized Uranium vs the entire atmosphere. The amount of contributed aerosolized uranium pales in comparison even when just compared to radiation from the stars in the sky. It is insufficient quantities to matter. Furthermore, "test data" is irrelevant without certifiable proof with long-term statistical analysis and an elimination of all other sources of radiation in the test sample (not possible since we have the constant bombardment of radiation from everything else.

Just wondering, what is your profession? I highly doubt you are in the field, of Science, because you think the world was created in 7 days( every time I hear that, I just start laughing)

also, did you actually read the rest of the evidence? cos what ever you are saying is nonsense. There is a link between DU rounds fired, and related illnesses, that you mentioned above.

StrangeTalent wrote:

Please be careful to not insult another user's religion.

but will be careful, incase I do by accident

I happily admit that I'm a Christian -- born-again and thankful for my new life as a member of the family of God. I also am quite ready to admit -- and honestly proclaim -- that I do believe in six days of creation (God rested on the seventh).

I am an apologist of the faith, but that is not my profession. My official profession is Software Engineer. I have a Bachelor of Science in Software Engineering with a minor in Applied Mathematics. My advisor strongly urged me to go to graduate school, but I preferred to get into the field.

I am a critical thinker and I specialize in programming algorithms, mathematics and logic, physics (multiple branches), and software design. I'm an avid gamer but I spend nearly as much time reading and learning as I do playing. Aside from all that, I really consider myself a jack-of-all-trades as I'm interested in so many wide-varying specialties.

I am a hobbyist in carpentry, landscaping, remodeling, writing, and I give free IT support to friends and family. I'm also very musical with some piano and I have a wide-ranging, classically-trained, singing voice. I also studied religious education and considered going into the ministry as either a religious educator (Youth Pastor or Christian School teacher) or a music leader (Pastoral Musician specialist). I also strongly considered Physics as a major, and I did have that as my major for a while. But, in the long run, I fell in love with programming.

For a time, I was -- in fact -- an ordained minister on a probationary basis but gave it up in favor of my scientific direction. Though I'm not officially a minister of God in my denomination, I consider myself as a minister in the Kingdom of God. My citizenship is in Heaven first. So, with that, as an American, also, I consider myself to have dual citizenship.

.

I also like long walks on the beach and then settling down with a warm campfire as the sun sets on the sea. Or I might enjoy a night drifting on the ocean in a small yacht with music in the air and someone to love in my arms. I'm looking to settle down but I'm not interested in just settling. I'm 5' 11" and a half, brown eyes, brown hair, and a smile that will make your heart jump. I'm into the finer things, but I'm just as happy with simple joys and inexpensive pleasantries. If you are a like-minded kind of woman who wants a man to just be a man but who also has integrity and strength of character, please contact me.

Oh wait, this isn't a personal ad...

Diabolical wrote:

I happily admit that I'm a Christian -- born-again and thankful for my new life as a member of the family of God. I also am quite ready to admit -- and honestly proclaim -- that I do believe in six days of creation (God rested on the seventh).

I am an apologist of the faith, but that is not my profession. My official profession is Software Engineer. I have a Bachelor of Science in Software Engineering with a minor in Applied Mathematics. My advisor strongly urged me to go to graduate school, but I preferred to get into the field.

I am a critical thinker and I specialize in programming algorithms, mathematics and logic, physics (multiple branches), and software design. I'm an avid gamer but I spend nearly as much time reading and learning as I do playing. Aside from all that, I really consider myself a jack-of-all-trades as I'm interested in so many wide-varying specialties.

I am a hobbyist in carpentry, landscaping, remodeling, writing, and I give free IT support to friends and family. I'm also very musical with some piano and I have a wide-ranging, classically-trained, singing voice. I also studied religious education and considered going into the ministry as either a religious educator (Youth Pastor or Christian School teacher) or a music leader (Pastoral Musician specialist). I also strongly considered Physics as a major, and I did have that as my major for a while. But, in the long run, I fell in love with programming.

For a time, I was -- in fact -- an ordained minister on a probationary basis but gave it up in favor of my scientific direction. Though I'm not officially a minister of God in my denomination, I consider myself as a minister in the Kingdom of God. My citizenship is in Heaven first. So, with that, as an American, also, I consider myself to have dual citizenship.

.

I also like long walks on the beach and then settling down with a warm campfire as the sun sets on the sea. Or I might enjoy a night drifting on the ocean in a small yacht with music in the air and someone to love in my arms. I'm looking to settle down but I'm not interested in just settling. I'm 5' 11" and a half, brown eyes, brown hair, and a smile that will make your heart jump. I'm into the finer things, but I'm just as happy with simple joys and inexpensive pleasantries. If you are a like-minded kind of woman who wants a man to just be a man but who also has integrity and strength of character, please contact me.

Oh wait, this isn't a personal ad...

why do ppl dont get warned , banned for spamming and going offtopic ?