nuclear-news

This Month

To find items about  a topic, or  a name – scroll down this sidebar and use the Search slot

Nuclear power: The Doomsday Machine

“Dealing in Doubt” – new book exposes the climate scepticism industry   http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2013/sep/12/greenpeace-climate-change-denial-dealing-doubt-report

  EVENTS

 Fukushima Petitions ☢ Please Sign and Share! Japan needs Worldwide Help NOW! 

Stop Fukushima Radiation – UN Action Needed
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/STOP_FUKUSHIMA_RADIATION_UN_ACTION_NEEDED/

Mobilize the U.N. Security Council to declare Fukushima a global emergency;
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/mobilize-the-un-security

Volunteers Needed: Baby Tooth Survey to Assess the Effect of Nuclear Fallout From Above-Ground Nuclear Testing http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2013/09/volunteers-needed-baby-tooth-survey-to-assess-the-effect-of-nuclear-fallout-from-above-ground-nuclea.html  

• October 10 – 19 – USA Preserve our Privacy: No Drone Spying in Maine peace walk
• October 13 – 14 – Tokyo - The Third Citizen–Scientist International Symposium on Radiation Protection - http://csrp.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-44.html
• November –  Santa Fe, Window Rock and Albuquerque, USA - Uranium Film Festival  http://www.uraniumfilmfestival.org/index.php/en/  
• November 1 – 3  - Karachi, Pakistan 3rd International Exhibition/ Conference on Renewable and Alternative Energy http://it.enfsolar.com/event/profile/exhibition/1133
• Dr Helen Caldicott speaking in USA http://www.helencaldicott.com/
• November 4 – Boston USA - Medical Consequences of the Nuclear Age
• November 9 –  New Hampshire USA
• November 13: Hollywood USA Opening  film   “Fallout for Karen Kramer”
• November 14: Grad Rounds at Cedar Sinai Hospital in LA (USA)

• January 1 2014 – Taiwan - “Fourth Nuclear Power Plant termination” relay walk around the nation, ending at the Presidential Office on Jan. 1

The science Denial Industry   - theme for October 2013 

How do we decide if an article or opinion is believable or not?

1.We start with - “Does this make sense to me?

For example:   Asbestos’s tiny hook-like fibres, breathed in to the lungs, can lodge there, start an irritation that, over time, becomes  a cancer.

2. We go on with:  What do the world’ reputable science bodies say?

They say – “Asbestos cause mesothelioma, and asbestosis.

For over 50 years, asbestos companies denied that asbestos was harmful.

3. We can then put their  statements to that other test: –  “What’s In It For Whom?“.   pretty clearly, there was money in it for them.

Those 3 tests can be applied to the tobacco-cancer question, and also to the global warming question. It is clear that for tobacco and for coal, oil, and gas industries, there’s money in denial of the science.

But now – what if so many “experts”, researchers, think tanks, established journalists, come out with persuasive arguments denying climate science?     They are surely wise and impartial, aren’t they?

Well, they’re not impartial, but perhaps wise enough to know who is paying them to cast doubt on, to deny, the science.

In the case of climate science, there are many complexities, such as a recent slowing down of the rate of global warming, such as an uneven pattern of sea level rise.  Science is not about absolute certainty, but on global warming it is about 95% certainty.

In the tobacco cancer story, there are some people who smoke all their lives, and don’t get lung cancer. And some non-smokers who do get lung cancer.  Does this disprove the science?  No.

With ionising radiation, there are even more complexities. Not least, the fact that there are many other causes of cancer, and for an individual case, it is difficult to prove that low dose radiation was the cause.

Nevertheless, the case for low dose ionising radiation being harmful passes tests Nos 1 and 2.

It takes a lot of unraveling, but behind the media, university, think tanks, researchers who deny that low dose radiation is harmful,  will be found the money motive.   The military and commercial nuclear industries are just “too big to fail”, so huge money is going in to those radiation deniers.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) still holds to the principle that there is no safe level of ionising radiation. This is despite its connection with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  WHO struggles, under great pressure, as it is bound not to damage the nuclear industry, – it still struggles to tell the truth.