Well making you 'pretend to laugh' makes me sleep tight now a days.
Good to know that I helped someone get his long lost sleep.
You are the one who made the posit.
Or may be we can try if you could develop a thicker skin!
I am sure you know how to develop a thicker skin. I have no doubt.
Well that's what you and others (who are really hurt) think!
And so does the entire community of nuclear physicist. But hey, they are all thick heads.
You are actually 'denying the correlatives', but still eating dust time and again!
Yes I know that reference has still got your undies in a Gordian knot, because, after all, it flushes all your assertions down the pooper.
Allow me to say this; Ignoratio elenchi!
Do you really know what that means. Can you show which part of that argument was ignoratio elenchi.
That's the best answer you could come up with?!
Anything else and it would have flown straight over your ultra thin head.
Sorry i forgot that i am talking with Dr APJ Abdul Kalam!!
No. I am A.Q.Khan.
Exactly in the same manner as currently you are failing to save your turd.
I was under the impression that turds are meant to be not saved. Why, is that what you do? No wonder.
With this i can confidently conclude that you are suffering from 'base rate fallacy' and cant be helped!!
You should first learn what these fallacies are before throwing them around.
Anyway.
Your first assertion was: Security breach in a civilian nuclear power plant, entails the same degree of risk as security breach in nuclear warhead storage facility (all things remaining same).
Your second assertion was: 'Leak' at Kaiga involved fissile material.
Your third assertion was: Fissile material in a nuclear power plant is just as accessible as the heavy water, that was involved in the so called 'leak'.
You couldn't substantiate and uphold a single assertion. Neither with logic, nor with data.