Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "Curious Droid" channel.

  1.  @nathanlevesque7812  Complete nonsense. They tried hard to avoid using the bombs.
    7
  2.  @nathanlevesque7812  The alternative story is that Japan would have surrendered for no reason whatsoever and that the USA knew it? I can understand why the "official" story is more popular. You can argue what role Russia's imminent involvement played vs the bombs, but to say that Japan would have surrendered if they were threatened by neither and that this was known to their enemies is absurd. Even after two bombs dropped, parts of the Japanese leadership were unwilling to surrender.
    7
  3.  @nathanlevesque7812  Both. Besides those sources contradict you. One says that the Japanese likely surrendered due to the Russian threat, rather than for no reason whatsoever. Nor do they support the notion that the USA knew that Japan would surrender to them for no reason whatsoever. The USA repeatedly threatened Japan and asked it surrender, but they didn't. Even after the first bomb. An awkward fact for your revisionism.
    6
  4. Every single aspect of war has changed drastically even during the last centuries. You couldn't make a more ignorant statement if you tried.
    3
  5. What do you mean with seem? He WAS a traitor as evidenced by him working against the development of fusion bombs and nuclear nonproliferation etc.
    3
  6. I know this because I read The Martian. :3
    2
  7.  @terrylambert8149  Which is complete bullshit. Teller was the friend to nukes that we all wish we had.
    2
  8.  @michaelsommers2356  There's machines that have lasted for over a hundred years. Pumps, engines, etc. Not sure what you mean with "complex". The ISS wasn't supposed to last longer. There challenges of concept and challenges in specifics. Of course in futurism we are talking about challenges in the concepts: What can in principle allow X? For an interstellar spaceship that's the propulsion and shielding. Repair/self repair and redundancies are pretty straight forward conceptually although of course it would need work in detail. So in effect that just ads to the weight.
    2
  9. The planet really couldn't care less.
    2
  10. I thought that for the purpose of this discussion being "in space" means being at least in orbit.
    1
  11. Little. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy for people to act stupidly and often nuclear reactors aren't the most economically viable option - especially short term.
    1
  12. You didn't pay attention. The question is: why can't the planes reach outer space. A boat CAN reach the land. A boat can beach itself.
    1
  13. No, he explained why it can't GET into space. Also you probably could get into space with an airplane on another planet. You can drive a car into the ocean without the car working in the ocean. You can beach a ship without the ship working on land.
    1
  14. Slick- Pickle That's impossible. You may ask what it would need to end human civilisation. Our current bombs are sufficient to bring an end to civilisation on the Northern hemisphere (maybe excluding Greenland and Sibiria, but there is nothing anyways...)
    1
  15. There was no nuclear war, because the USA and USSR, despite seeing each other as the incarnation of evil, were concerned about the future of the world and their own existence. That's not true for everyone. Not at all.
    1
  16.  @jesusramirezromo2037  Most people didn't buy "Juicero". Most people made fun of it. That's the worst possible example you could have brought forth.
    1
  17. That doesn't do anything to the "variety of species". Perhaps you should work on reducing the vastness of your ignorance before calling others insane.
    1
  18. Your teacher is even dumber than you during elementary school.
    1
  19.  @legbert123  Most people don't have to care, because they can't afford them anyways.
    1
  20.  @simrangill3299  That's no explanation at all. You can drive a car into the ocean without the car working in the ocean. I'm pretty sure under certain circumstances a plane could leave a planet, you just need the right planet.
    1
  21.  @poisongas6033 You could easily build a plane that works without oxygen. We already have fuels that contain their own oxygen. You could have planes flying around in an atmosphere with 0% oxygen.
    1
  22. Bullshit. Not a single person has ever suffered because of "humanity's ego", but millions upon millions have suffered horribly from "higher causes". I'd rather people put more trust in themselves.
    1
  23.  @Chaosarchy  Capitalism is just the absence of communism. It's a commie word adapted by the mainstream.
    1
  24. Working together isn't good. Working together on sth good is good. Much better to have several parties at each others throat than one unavoidable totalitarian state.
    1
  25.  @asdzt123  Teller was easily the best. Way ahead of his time. Still hasn't gotten the credit he deserves. Oppenheimer was made a saint by the anti-nuke crazies, a movement we still haven't gotten over yet.
    1
  26. The main problem is not biological evolution but evolution of goals. The people you allow to leave to solar system might become your enemies in the future. Besides it makes absolutely no sense to travel to another solar system because your home planet is somehow made uninhabitable. If you can build an interstellar starship you can easily build space habitats. An interstellar starship is a space habitat, plus propulsion, plus shielding, plus tons of redundancies and self repair mechanisms. If you can build one, you can live anywhere in the galaxy anyways and don't need planets.
    1
  27. Wipe out a city? You are completely clueless, huh?
    1
  28. You haven't held a calculator since high school, I wouldn't rely on you to tell anyone what's the chance for anything or what's possible.
    1
  29.  @Simp44  Why don't you provide some evidence for your thesis instead of insulting him?
    1
  30. Most of that was desert or desolate islands. No one wanted to live there anyways.
    1
  31.  @aok9153  Lift doesn't require oxygen. And whether your engine needs oxygen in addition to the fuel it's carrying depends on the fuel.
    1
  32.  @johnedwards1321  I think the distinction here is being in orbit or faster than that vs falling down.
    1
  33.  @timrobinson513  How tf is what you are doing any more important? And why tf do you think they would have fewer things to do in the first place? In fact there's probably more to do bcs you can control everything about the artificial habitat.
    1
  34. So they were only worried about Jews, not the victims of the Japanese.
    1
  35. Absolute nonsense. There are abundant examples of tribal societies, who are constantly at war. And the leaders are leaders, because they have won wars and skirmishes and because they were effective raiders. A leader not participating in combat directly is a sign of cultural progress.
    1
  36.  @PRH123  People from 1940 would find a smartphone way more impressive than an interstellar spacecraft.
    1
  37. Thousands of interceptors could stop it.
    1
  38.  @theosmid8321  Wtf are you talking about? There is no reason to think that live on an interstellar spaceship would be uncomfortable. Indeed it might be a paradise and better than anything anyone ever had in the past. In an artificial habitat you can control everything. You can make it rain when you want, make the sun shine when you want, even modify the gravity.
    1
  39. I wonder where people take the arrogance from to make predictions about the next "50+" years. Why "suspended animation"? You don't have to send people and if you do the ones, who arrive, don't have to be the same that departed. Even if you only go at 1% of the speed of light on average you reach proxima centauri in under 500 years.
    1
  40. It's not like the US government came to their come and injected the cancer into their skin. They merely acted negligently.
    1
  41. I want a nuclear car. I'll drive carefully, I promise.
    1
  42. They haven't and that's not the cause of people dying from cancer. People die from cancer, because they are not dying from anything else. Hygiene has become better, we have vaccines, anti-biotics, we are better at treating injuries, cars and workplaces have become safer. If nothing else kills you, you will eventually get cancer. That's a certainty.
    1
  43. Destroy? Those atolls are still atolls and just as beautiful.
    1
  44. It's not that bad, they had thousands.
    1
  45. You can bring a solar sail and also use the electric charge of the heliosphere to slow down by turning on electro-magnets.
    1
  46.  Cameron Moore  Yeah if anything it got much better after Stalin's death.
    1