Not Newsworthy, But . . .

What does make the world turn?
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Feb 04, 2017 12:45 am

What is irrational, TJ, is the belief held by Greenpeace and their fellow travellers, that those weaknesses of government organisations and other groups, are special to nuclear power. Or that the consequences of such failures are worse for nuclear power. Not suggesting that you are guilty of that belief, since I am talking of the idiot organisations.

The same can be said for coal burning power stations, hydroelectricity, gas burners, geothermal, wind turbines, and in facts pretty much everything that governments are involved in. We had a case here in NZ recently, where a council body made a big stuff up of a potable water source - a bore that was too shallow and got contaminated, making many people ill, and killing several. That was way, way worse than Fukushima because people died. But no one is making the kind of remarks about drinking water sourcing as they make about nuclear power, even though drinking water is so very important, and a stuff up has such dire consequences.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:59 am

Yes, I generally agree with that - except for this one little niggle... for your water example, and for the other energy sources - none have the potential to make a large region uninhabitable to humans for hundreds of years. Of course there are other ways that governments might be able to do so - for example nuclear war or unaddressed climate change. There are uninhabitable places already - the oceans and active volcanos, so adding a few more might be acceptable just as it seems it is with climate change.

I am all for expansion of nuclear energy if the issues I listed are addressed.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:50 am

TJ

I have to say that the 'potential' argument is one I have little sympathy for. I prefer reality.

Nuclear power has already had its truly nasty accident, in the form of Chernobyl, and the 30 kilometer exclusion zone is so little affected that it has become a major asset in conservation.

Real experience shows that nuclear power is less dangerous than almost any other method of generating large amounts of electricity. Hydroelectricity has killed far more people (via dam bursts) and has inundated vast areas of pristine wilderness. Burning coal kills millions via respiratory illness, and produces millions of tonnes of toxic waste in the form of gases and coal ash. By comparison, nuclear power is a pussy cat.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:01 pm

Special for Lance – several confirmed deaths due to the Fukushima meltdowns….

Melted Nuclear Fuel Search Proceeds One Death ... at a Time

Fukushima Deaths

:D

User avatar
Nobrot
Poster
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 10:59 pm

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Nobrot » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:41 pm

TJrandom wrote:Special for Lance – several confirmed deaths due to the Fukushima meltdowns….

Melted Nuclear Fuel Search Proceeds One Death ... at a Time

Fukushima Deaths

:D

From the link...
The latest robot seeking to find the 600 tons of nuclear fuel and debris that melted down six year ago in Japan’s wrecked Fukushima Dai-Ichi power plant met its end in less than a day.

Asimov warned years ago of the dangers of exposing a robots fragile little mind to Gamma rays.
Image

Would they listen? No.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:51 pm

TJ

Sure. Robots have died. As I pointed out, the inside of the Fukushima plant is dangerous. My thesis has been about the exterior, where 1500 evacuees died due to the stress of unnecessary evacuation.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:32 am

New robots to the rescue….

Factory unveils 'muscle robots' to be used in Fukushima nuke plant dismantling

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:59 am

Today is our 6th year anniversary of the 3/11 earthquake & tsunami that devastated Japan north of here. The TV programs are replaying the video footage of the event, and showing people seemingly unconcerned, and moving slowly, just moments before being overtaken by the water. Some even going toward the shoreline when the water was initially receding to take a look, before it all came back with a vengeance. When seconds counted….

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19455
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:31 am

TJrandom wrote:Today is our 6th year anniversary of the 3/11 earthquake & tsunami that devastated Japan north of here. The TV programs are replaying the video footage of the event, and showing people seemingly unconcerned, and moving slowly, just moments before being overtaken by the water. Some even going toward the shoreline when the water was initially receding to take a look, before it all came back with a vengeance. When seconds counted….

US news programs were apparently careful to not show anyone actually being overtaken by the advancing waters. :roll:
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:22 am

At last, a look into responsibility for the Fukushima nuclear meltdown. And while it is good that the court will examine this question for Fukushima, several plants will restart operations under `we will eventually comply with safety measures` approaches… Including the remote placement of backup generators susceptible to tsunamis.

Trial of 3 former TEPCO execs to begin soon


http://newsonjapan.com/html/newsdesk/article/120355.php

Expect court results in 20 years or so....

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:44 am

The trial should be of the idiot politicians and bureaucrats who ordered the ridiculous and unnecessary evacuation. They are told before hand that it was not needed, by radiation experts, and they still went ahead. One estimate is that 1500 people died, not as a result of the nuclear problem, but due to the stress of the evacuation. When desperately Ill people are dragged out of their hospital beds and taken away to a different hospital, the people who ordered that done should be held liable.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:59 am

Yes yes Lance, but let`s take one step at a time. Besides, where have you ever heard of politicians being prosecuted for doing their jobs? IMO your broken record kneejerk repeat of this mime is simply there to detract from the actual story as it unfolds. Please say it isn`t so.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 4:45 am

Where is the justice, TJ, in prosecuting people for deaths they did not cause while letting those who are responsible off ?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:26 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Where is the justice, TJ, in prosecuting people for deaths they did not cause while letting those who are responsible off ?


I see. But I do believe the court is to determine if they are guilty for deaths. Or are you saying that no one should be charged because everyone who might be guilty cannot be?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:56 am

TO

If the nuclear accident killed people, and the accident was the result of mismanagement, then prosecute the managers. But that was not the case. No one died as a result of the nuclear accident. But a humungous lot of people died as a result of the misinformed evacuation . Who should be prosecuted ? The nuclear plant managers, or those who ordered the evacuation ? Against the advice of radiation experts.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:02 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:TO

If the nuclear accident killed people, and the accident was the result of mismanagement, then prosecute the managers. But that was not the case. No one died as a result of the nuclear accident. But a humungous lot of people died as a result of the misinformed evacuation . Who should be prosecuted ? The nuclear plant managers, or those who ordered the evacuation ? Against the advice of radiation experts.


Well, in this case - these men are being prosecuted for failure to follow up on warnings that their plant was vulnerable to a tsunami by not acting on the suggested solutions that would have prevented the meltdown from occurring even with the tsunami. They are not charged with murder, but rather with professional negligence leading to loss of property and/or life.

It is the same charge I would face if I caused an automobile accident resulting in deaths which was cause-contributed by high speed, following too closely, falling asleep, an unmaintained vehicle, etc. – since I am a licensed, and thus a professional driver. As TEPCO executives, these men too were professionals who`s failure to act is being reviewed by the court.

Again, the politicians having made a bad call on evacuation, is irrelevant to this case.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:08 pm

Perhaps, TJ, but I bet the politicians will get off without charge, and they were directly responsible for numerous lives lost. The nuclear plant executives were not responsible for any lost lives.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:33 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Perhaps, TJ, but I bet the politicians will get off without charge, and they were directly responsible for numerous lives lost. The nuclear plant executives were not responsible for any lost lives.


Yes Lance - that is the case for politicians who make bad judgement calls, but then they are not professionals and laws on professional negligence do not cover them. No need to bet, since that is the law.

I personally agree with you on the executives and suspect that will be a significant part of their defense, but it is up to the court to decide. Where I do believe they were professionally negligent, is on their not following up on pre-disaster safety audit recommendations made years in advance. Much the same as if my car tires were flagged for excessive wear in a car safety inspection, but ignored by me, lead to a crash.

I`ll say no more at this time, since I do feel we are beating a dead horse.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:50 pm

Seriously unbalanced. If the executives are to be prosecuted, so too should the politicians. Otherwise it is pure scapegoatism.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:54 pm

Pure scapegoatism is when you go after purely innocent people. Not the case here.

Politicians should never be prosecuted for actions taken according to their duties absent specific criminal statutes being violated. Thats what POLITICS is all about.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:04 pm

If that is the case, Bobbo, it is pure hypocrisy.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:13 pm

How is it hypocrisy Lance? Now..... I understand what you are saying.........but you don't. You are whining on like an old lady with the vapors. In short: you fail to recognize any balance at all. Want to hold politicians criminally liable for what others do?===>you will only get politicians who think they can game that system: ie, out and out criminals instead of the merely greedy and avaricious.

It makes a difference.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:43 pm

Any situation where the boss says "one rule for me and a different rule for you", is hypocrisy. When politicians are immune but executives are not, that fits this category.

We have a situation where some executives are being condemned for failing to allow for a 9 meter tsunami. Yet their failure cost no lives. At the same time, 25,000 lives were lost to that tsunami in Japan, due to its direct effects. Should you condemn (for example) a car park owner who failed to protect those using his car park from the tsunami ?

I see this trial as scapegoatism since it is clearly politically motivated.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:58 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:... I see this trial as scapegoatism since it is clearly politically motivated.


Oh? Where did that come from Lance? Do you think that the affected citizens who had to force the prosecutors to do their job, over coming two court dismissals in the process, are simply politically motivated?

Nice try. Maybe if I ever cause an automobile accident while drunk, sleepy, and driving a defective car for which I had obtained prior warnings - I will try that as a defence. Your Honour, this is all a big mistake and so obviously politically motivated. Instead of prosecuting me, please charge the licensing bureau for giving me a license in the first place. Oh, and don`t forget the Minister of Transportation and Industry.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:47 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Any situation where the boss says "one rule for me and a different rule for you", is hypocrisy. When politicians are immune but executives are not, that fits this category.


No. the politicians are not the boss of the executives.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:16 am

TO

Politically motivated is using a scapegoat to divert attention from the real culprits.

Bobbo

Politicians are the boss of all of us.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 01, 2017 1:54 am

Lance Kennedy wrote: Bobbo

Politicians are the boss of all of us.

Playing the retard is not fair when the character is too close to the subject.

No. Politicians are not the boss of anyone referenced in this thread. Not even of you. You'll have to blame someone else (like yourself) for any bad decision making.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:16 am

Regardless of who is the boss of whom, in this case, politicians and bureaucrats made an evacuation decision that killed a whole lot of people, and they are trying to foist the blame on nuclear power executives who had nothing to do with that decision.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:18 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Regardless of who is the boss of whom, in this case, politicians and bureaucrats made an evacuation decision that killed a whole lot of people, and they are trying to foist the blame on nuclear power executives who had nothing to do with that decision.


Hogwash Lance, pure and simple hogwash.

It is the politicians and the executives - who have fought to keep these three TEPCO executives from being charged with professional negligence. Harmed people - those whose homes were radiated, and NOT politicians nor executives, who have fought thru the courts and have used the law to their advantage to finally have their day in court against these three executives who ignored the warnings made well in advance, are the plaintiffs, not the politicians.

It will be the politicians who ensure that these three get let off with a slap on the wrist, if indeed found guilty. Personally I do not expect that to happen, since elites everywhere seem shielded from justice.

You are arguing black is white, and at best - that you just don`t like white.

This is an important case, for the future of nuclear energy and industry in general – that I hope publicizes the fallacy of short term corporate gains over public safety, even if they are acquitted. The very same mistake is occurring today with the plants that are being brought back online – with safety measures `assumed to have been addressed`, just so long as they have been built into 5-year plans, instead of implemented prior to restart. What Japan does not need, and what the nuclear energy industry does not need – is another disaster caused by not having backup power generators above the waterline, or for any of the other critical design faults for which corrective actions have been proposed, and upon which the restart decision rests.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:41 am

TH

You may be right in saying the impetus for this action comes from 'victims' instead of politicians. But they are not victims of the nuclear accident. The radiation released was simply too low to harm anyone outside the plant. Their perception may be different, of course, since very few people truly appreciate the science.

The only true harm to people came either from the earthquake and tsunami, or from the politicians and bureaucrats who ordered an unnecessary evacuation. Not from the nuclear accident. That is why prosecuting those executives is wrong. Those who died were victims of a flawed political decision.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:51 am

Harm is a fickle concept. Loss of businesses because no tourist will visit or build or invest in the area, loss of market because nobody will buy their fish, loss of marriage potential, because nobody will date an irradiated person, is still harm to those so impacted – no matter that you think Japan`s radiation exposure limits to be set too low.

BTW – there is another court case that will occur, since the US Navy sailors who were irradiated during their assistance efforts while the radiation data was being sat upon, have been cleared to pursue justice thru the courts.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 4:34 am

http://www.world-nuclear.org/informatio ... osure.aspx

Yes, you are correct that harm is a fickle concept. Sadly, irrational thinking and superstition can also cause harm. But is that the fault of the executives ?

When you look at the scientific basis for any conception of harm, you bypass all that nonsense and superstition. As my reference above will tell you
1. An exposure of more than 100 millisieverts is needed to cause harm.
2. Outside the plant, the MOST any one might get is 30 millisieverts spread over 12 months, making it utterly harmless.

Again, if the harm is based on bulldust superstition, then are those executives at fault? I would rather the court case prosecuted the people who spread the falsehoods.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:31 am

Funny, nowhere in that article did I find `livelihood`, `marriage`, `business`, `tourist`, or `economy` mentioned.

For perspective, since April I have received 4 CT exams with each giving between 20 to 60 mSv of radiation or approximately 53 years’ worth from background radiation altogether.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 9:02 am

The original Hiroshima studies showed that people who received 100 millisieverts or less lived as long as people from the rest of Japan. For radiation to cause measurable harm, you need a dose, over a short time period, of at least 250 millisieverts. If spread over a long time, it is less serious. The residents of Ramsa in Iran, receiver 250 millisieverts per year, all their lives, and the cancer rate is no higher than anywhere else in Iran.

Background radiation varies from place to place. Global average is about 3 millisieverts per year. But 250 millisieverts per year, or over 80 times the "normal" background appears to be quite harmless.

That is the potential for harm from radiation. But what of the harm from superstition ? Frankly, I have a lot less sympathy. If superstition is the problem then deal with superstition. Don't go round blaming people who fail to cause harm with radiation because social harm comes from fallacious ideas, instead of something real.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:09 am

Don't go round blaming people who fail to cause harm with radiation because social harm comes from fallacious ideas, instead of something real.


It will be interesting to see if the court makes that distinction, or if it will support the politicians who made the call on evacuation.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3071
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby ElectricMonk » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:04 am

What if they hadn't evacuated and the damage wasn't contained?
You can't move millions of people with the push of a button.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:34 pm

EM

You still have not understood. Even Chernobyl generated very little radiation OUTSIDE the plant. I define "very little " as being well below the more than 100 millisieverts required to cause harm, within any reasonable expected exposure time..

At the time of the evacuation at Fukushima, the level of environmental radiation was known. These days, such measurements are easy. The radiation experts recommended against the evacuation because it was not needed. The politicians went ahead regardless.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 9:52 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:EM

You still have not understood. Even Chernobyl generated very little radiation OUTSIDE the plant. I define "very little " as being well below the more than 100 millisieverts required to cause harm, within any reasonable expected exposure time..

At the time of the evacuation at Fukushima, the level of environmental radiation was known. These days, such measurements are easy. The radiation experts recommended against the evacuation because it was not needed. The politicians went ahead regardless.


There was a lot of fanfare and confusion in those times, with companies and embassies pulling staff out and sending them home, and with countries suggesting no travel to Japan. Just as TEPCO was hiding information, the government too was suspected to be doing the same.

I had to work hard at resisting a call to move our staff to Osaka where we maintained a remote office and data center backup facility. I was also receiving emails from ex-coworkers from three prior companies from California, NY, and Singapore seeking risk information to assess whether they should refuse to travel to Japan.

Local communities of concerned citizens purchased their own equipment and scoured their neighborhoods in an attempt to determine the degree of irradiation, since the government was not forthcoming. And indeed they did find contamination where none was supposedly had occurred according to the government.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:08 pm

TJ

I understand. That is always the conundrum skeptics find themselves in. We appreciate reality, based on good science, but we are surrounded by superstitious people, who believe nonsense. How do you operate according to the solid data, when irrational people push for irrational actions.?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Not Newsworthy, But . . .

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:50 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:How do you operate according to the solid data, when irrational people push for irrational actions.?

Ummm...... according to your own best interests as the situation may allow?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?


Return to “Science, Technology, and Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest