Unlikely

[john75]

www.greenpeace.org.uk/fridaythe13th/

[dmitsi]

Watching that without sound was brilliant, only made better by the end with the plane. Go Greenpeace, you show us the way!!

Come to think of it, those nuclear power stations might also attract pikeys trying to find some free power for the caravans, better tell Tony no!!

[DieselJohn]

Distasteful shite.

[Parrot of Doom]

I doubt a jet at full pelt, fully laden with fuel, would be able to defeat a well designed cooling system.

[nuclearsquash]

aren't nuclear station cores built to withstand plane and missile impacts? what a total load of propoganda! and distasteful, espcially to those who lost someone on 9/11

[FourWheelDrift]

[extreme_sarcasm]
Ooooo wow, imagine that, what a catastrophe, what an amazing 1:100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of that happening.
[/extreme_sarcasm]

Scaremongering congenital idiots. They've got better odds of a government anti-terrorist organisation sinking their ship, again.

[Harry Flashman]

Nothing a couple of batteries of ground-to-air missiles at each plant won't solve.

[nuclearsquash]

is there anyway we could complain about this piece of crap? ASA or suchlike? Really makes me want to spew seeing that shite.

[SpencerO]

isn't it about time this bunch of soap dodgers tried invading another trading floor? (crosses fingers)

[motco]

Why would they do this? They got massive publicity for the Twin Towers because of the death toll. A nuclear power station wouldn't give anything like the death toll as, say Canary Wharf, and any after effects would take far too long to manifest themselves for any real propaganda value. Anyway, air traffic control might notice an airliner THAT far off the normal course. The Twin Towers site is within a few km of three airports - 'planes are a normal feature of the sky. Thurso is in MAMBA* country.


*miles and miles of bugger all

[FunkyNige]

Did you see how relatively little damage a plane did the Pentagon?
Have you seen the video of the test where they flew an F4 into a piece of the concrete used to surround nuclear reactors at 500mph?

A plane would barely scratch it.

I agree it's very distasteful, who can we comlpain to about this?

[Parrot of Doom]

Nobody, as its more likely to be viral advertising.

[Petrol_noggin]

so greenpeace's message is more coal burning stations and less nuclear power?

[lockstock2sb]

Petrol_noggin said:

so greenpeace's message is more coal burning stations and less nuclear power?

lentil burning more like. Whats the odds of a plane crashing into a nuclear power station ???? Better still - whats the odds of a nuclear power station actually blowing up or spreading radiation over the countryside because of a plane hit (i've seen the crash testing vid against a bunker wall - they are over engineeered to the extreme from what i can see)????

If anything the plane will give way before any kind of nuclear facilities core protection in an impact.

Utter crap and needless scaremongering!!! W*nkers.


>> Edited by lockstock2sb on Wednesday 25th January 17:56

[Petrol_noggin]

After several calculations, ive come up with scarily high chances that a greenpeace member (and i mean member in every way) could accidently leave their lentil soup in a microwave for too long and cause a widespread radiation disaster, think chernobyl II, with lentils.

[voyds9]

Cool but was the end missing

[deevlash]

I remember going on a school trip to Torness nuclear power station and my lentilist teacher asking what would happen if a jumbo smacked into it. She got told to shut up and stop being stupid because it was apparently designed to withstand missile impacts and plane crashes. Might have been pro nuke propoganda but that advert is sensationalist rubbish. How difficult would it be to fly a plane into a building that small anyway? The twin towers were massive and i doubt the pentagon was ever hit by a plane...

[C C]

I’m surprised they didn’t kill two birds with one stone and show a new Land Rover Discovery crashing into the power station...

[pony power]

the annoying thing is that nuclear power is the only really feasible option to stop climate change as the power gains from "green" energies are next to nothing how else are we going to stop burning loads of fossil fuels
and its not like thee unsafe, the only reasons in the past for nuclear melt downs is because of human error and the stations being built too quickly. if they are managed by a few super computers i would fell quite safe with having them near by

>> Edited by pony power on Wednesday 25th January 19:57

[MilnerR]

Greenpeace and the like want us to all live in caves. Their views on the world are rarely troubled by reality so the content of that propaganda doesn't surprise me.
What does surprise me is the thought that thousands and thousands of tons of reinforced concrete and steel can be destroyed by a few hundred tonnes of thin metal and plastic..... they can't expect any thinking person to believe this? Oh wait..... I think i'm on the verge of spotting their strategy!