User talk:76.240.172.212

Chernobyl vs Fukushima
I had participated in Wikipedia editing years ago only to be frustrated by the excessive rules and mysterious editors who deleted content that was properly cited on Wikipedia. Facts about military equipment that were cited on documentary television programs and from military officers mysteriously was removed by anonymous editors I traced back to the U.S. Navy at Coronado. There were other examples. I began to suspect that many topics of national interest were controlled by government interests and used for disinformation purposes. The discussion of Fukushima would be such a topic. I do not know if you are a disinformation specialist for sure, but in any case my information on Fukushima comes from National Geographic and other sources. I find the freak underground as you call it to be more reputable on some topics than Wikipedia. Are you going to throw the "tinfoil hat" label at me as well? That is a popular tactic used to attempt to discredit those with information not in line with the status quo. National Geographic ranked Fukushima as the biggest and worst nuclear accident in history, eclipsing Chernobyl. I have the article reference if you want. At this point, 6 years later, the total emission of dangerous radioactive isotopes exceeds Chernobyl by far, and it is still burning. I do not think you would disagree with that. I do not have time to commit to research on Wikipedia, only to have it mysteriously deleted months later. I find Wikipedia to be useful on many topics for light information, but not authoritative for anything. Sorry.

You seem to be long on criticism but short on facts. You dropped some very dubious facts over at Chernobyl Disaster, but over at the comparison page you merely vandalized that page. If you have facts, and they're backed up by reputable sources, them by all means go ahead and put them in place. If you looked at the pages histories, you can see that both of them are fairly active (and are frequently the target for vandalism), so perhaps the facts shown are the current ones that can be supported, as opposed to the facts that you can dig up out of the freak underground.

So, by all means, show us your stuff. SkoreKeep (talk) 01:34, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey SkoreKeep, look at the facts yourself. It is 2016 and Fukushima still burns. I guess that came from the freak underground as well. Sorry. Can you tell me the "official story" that I should believe? Anyway, in terms of total radiation released, Fukushima now surpasses Chernobyl. The amount of radioactive material lost to the environment dwarfs Chernobyl. Sorry to disrupt the orderly Wikipedia ecosystem.

June 2016
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Landing Craft Air Cushion are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.