ExFed

Like, I know the “no ragerts” thing is funny and all … but this is legit a great take. I wish more people took this approach. Take the small failures in stride.

I work at a father son activity centre…

That’s great!

…you would be shocked at how few women I see spending time with their own children!

I’m not at all shocked. Selfish behavior isn’t exclusive to men. Women are also deeply flawed humans.

These are US based and based on separated parents.

I provided non-anecdotal evidence, and you shit on it? What are your priorities?

Selectively observing statistics doesn’t give a good representation of real life, but shitting on other people for selectively observing statistics doesn’t help, either.

If you’ve been alive for more than 30 seconds, it’s not just anecdotal. But to appease the challenge, anyways: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-269.pdf There’s a massive imbalance between custodial fathers and custodial mothers. Even worse is the imbalance in child support negligence.

Can we please just admit that there are normal biological/social/economic/perceived/identity differences between men and women? That’s not to say all of those differences are good or desirable, or that they are without variation, but can we at least recognize the state of our world without shunning those with different viewpoints?

Harsh words. After all, Rankine is best.

No, let’s make that 20 years of more environmental destruction.

Okay, hold up. Just take a minute here to breathe. Nobody’s arguing against renewables. They, just like nuclear power, are a part of a healthy, diverse mix of technologies which will help displace fossil fuels. That’s the whole point: get rid of fossil fuels where we can in whatever way we can.

make the leap to nuclear … in 10-15 year’s time

We already did. 70 years ago. Then the fossil fuel industry successfully replaced existing nuclear generators with coal-fired plants.

If I was a fossil fuel lobbyist I’d be pushing new nuclear hard.

Are you seriously arguing that fossil fuel lobbyists do the exact opposite of what fossil fuel lobbyists have been recorded doing? In other words, are you trying to argue for a proven falsehood?

If so, we have a term for that: alternative facts. Go try and deceive someone else.

Cost is cost … [in 70 years] it’s not got cheaper, in fact the opposite has happened.

I suppose you must still think a loaf of bread still costs the same it did 70 years ago, too. Prices are malleable thanks to the free market … and government subsidies. Why would anyone be so anti-nuclear when it’s another valuable tool for displacing fossil fuels? Are you shilling for the oil and gas industry?

nuclear is fucking expensive and takes a long time to build

So what? Cost is relative to supply, demand, and political willpower. Also, I suspect it’s much cheaper than carbon recapture.

Given this, why would you be in favor of nuclear?

I think you’ve lost the point entirely. The question is “what do we need to effectively generate electricity without fossil fuels?” Nuclear is one such answer. Heaven forbid we encourage the development of more than one thing at a time.