The green movement has misled the world about the dangers of radiation.

C

cancel2 2022

Canceled
I used to think that George Monbiot was an awful environmental zealot but he has seemingly seen the light in recent times. He is at least honest, which is more than can be said for many greens.

Over the past fortnight I’ve made a deeply troubling discovery. The anti-nuclear movement to which I once belonged has misled the world about the impacts of radiation on human health. The claims we have made are ungrounded in science, unsupportable when challenged and wildly wrong. We have done other people, and ourselves, a terrible disservice.
Click to expand...

http://www.monbiot.com/2011/04/04/evidence-meltdown/
 
No shit. You wouldn't believe the shit I have to deal with when I tell people I use (well, have, I prefer to use other tungstens) 2% thoriated electrodes. "ZOMG that's radioactive!" :palm:
 
Well I'd say Tom and his link are just as guilty as hyperbole as people who are uninformed as to what constitutes a radiological hazard. What you've described is what we call in the field a PIC. That is, a Paranoia Inducing Compound. People see "radioactive" or "Lead" or "Dioxin" and with out any other relevent information they assume it's a serious health threat.

But the OP has really nothing to do with radiological hazards and is just another scurelous attack on sound environmental hazardous materials management. Just like the term "Thorium" is a PIC using "Green Movement", in Tom's, context is an attempt to marginalize a very serious public health and safety issue.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well I'd say Tom and his link are just as guilty as hyperbole as people who are uninformed as to what constitutes a radiological hazard. What you've described is what we call in the field a PIC. That is, a Paranoia Inducing Compound. People see "radioactive" or "Lead" or "Dioxin" and with out any other relevent information they assume it's a serious health threat.

But the OP has really nothing to do with radiological hazards and is just another scurelous attack on sound environmental hazardous materials management. Just like the term "Thorium" is a PIC using "Green Movement", in Tom's, context is an attempt to marginalize a very serious public health and safety issue.
Click to expand...

Hey Mott, do you know who George Monbiot is? He is quite rightly pointing out how some environmentalists play on the public's ignorance of radiation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot
 
Do you think the fears over the disaster in Japan are overblown? I am not a green nor do I claim to be an expert in the field but the higher levels of mutation seem rather alarming.

Maybe, Godzilla and Mothra will take care of the problems in our retirement systems.
 
TheSuperstringTheory said:
Do you think the fears over the disaster in Japan are overblown? I am not a green nor do I claim to be an expert in the field but the higher levels of mutation seem rather alarming.

Maybe, Godzilla and Mothra will take care of the problems in our retirement systems.
Click to expand...

One could argue that mutation is just evolution just working its magic right?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Only if it's random and over time, lots and lots of time.
Click to expand...

What do you think about the nuclear disater Mott? Should I becomne a vegan?

I eat a bit of fish and chicken and I am concerned that might not be a good idea any longer, if it ever was. Am I just worried about nothing?
 
TheSuperstringTheory said:
Do you think the fears over the disaster in Japan are overblown? I am not a green nor do I claim to be an expert in the field but the higher levels of mutation seem rather alarming.

Maybe, Godzilla and Mothra will take care of the problems in our retirement systems.
Click to expand...

Very much so, there is no denying that radiation was released but the hysteria was much greater. This Guardian report paints a truer picture.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/17/fukushima-beach-reopens-to-public
 
TheSuperstringTheory said:
Do you think the fears over the disaster in Japan are overblown? I am not a green nor do I claim to be an expert in the field but the higher levels of mutation seem rather alarming.

Maybe, Godzilla and Mothra will take care of the problems in our retirement systems.
Click to expand...

Very much so, there is no denying that radiation was released but the hysteria was much greater. This Guardian report paints a truer picture.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/17/fukushima-beach-reopens-to-public
 
TheSuperstringTheory said:
What do you think about the nuclear disater Mott? Should I becomne a vegan?

I eat a bit of fish and chicken and I am concerned that might not be a good idea any longer, if it ever was. Am I just worried about nothing?
Click to expand...
I would say that what happened in Japan demonstrates the central issue of nuclear power technology. For the most part they are operated with an exquisite levels of control and safety and when operated properly produce little in the way of pollution but when something goes wrong, as happened in Chernobyl and Japan, the consequences are catastrophic and disastrous on a very large scale.
 
Last edited:
FactsRStubborn said:
Then consider this a catalyst
Click to expand...
It's possible but unlikely. First it would have to affect a large number within a given population. Second it would have to affect a specific allele within that population, third that specific allele change within in that population would have to be very widely reproduced within that population over time and fourth the change in allele frequency would have to provide some sort of reproductive or survival advantage or it would not be widely reproduced within that population over time. Given enough time and exposure then the odds of such a change in an allele frequency accuring that meet these conditions would increase significantly. So it is possible but again unlikely.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It's possible but unlikely. First it would have to affect a large number within a given population. Second it would have to affect a specific allele within that population, third that specific allele change within in that population would have to be very widely reproduced within that population over time and fourth the change in allele frequency would have to provide some sort of reproductive or survival advantage or it would not be widely reproduced within that population over time. Given enough time and exposure then the odds of such a change in an allele frequency accuring that meet these conditions would increase significantly. So it is possible but again unlikely.
Click to expand...

Wow you make it sound like a statistical improbability
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top