[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proof of safety.
So that explains it . . And I was wondering why they are getting
divorced.
"D. Kosloff" wrote:
>
> Who said that Chernobyl wouldn't happen? Answer: Jane Fonda (literally, I
> saw it on TV, twice) and the US left wing in "The Nation" magazine (I read
> it). Who is now holding them to a high standard? Ted Turner at CNN?
>
> Who were that nuclear power advocates in the US who said that an RMBK
> accident was impossible?
>
> TMI was within the predicted range of accidents, although not for the
> specific reasons that caused it. What the DOE was doing was done as part of
> military operations, which had no "proof" of safety and were shrouded in
> secrecy with no estimate of negative consequences. Although there were
> "horror stories" there is still no actual evidence of negative consequences
> other than beryllium illness and the Thresher, which may have had too much
> nuclear safety as a contributer. When I was taking a course on nuclear
> weapons safety in 1966, the class was told that there would be an accidental
> nuclear weapons explosion every 20 years in the U. S. military.
>
> More people have died on the ground from crashing airplanes than have been
> killed from "something that happened" with nuclear power. Teddy Kennedy's
> car has killed more people than my nuclear power plant.
>
> Don Kosloff mailto:dkosloff@ncweb.com
> 2910 Main St., Perry, OH
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: William V Lipton <liptonw@dteenergy.com>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 1:25 PM
> Subject: Re: The FEAR is Our own worst enemy. (Re)
>
> > Perhaps, the reason we have such trouble proving a negative is that, as
> soon as we
> > "prove" that something can't happen, it does: TMI, Chernobyl, the myriad
> DOE
> > horror stories. The reason we're held to such a high standard is that we
> set this
> > standard, and then fail to deliver.
> >
> > The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
> > It's not about dose, it's about trust.
> >
> > Bill Lipton
> > liptonw@dteenergy.com
> >
> > Al Tschaeche wrote:
> >
> > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> > > --------------F5E29A2DE6C4764B3CA25210
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > >
> > > What a wonderful explanation of why one can't prove a negative! See my
> > > comments below.
> > >
> > > Bob Flood wrote:
> > >
> > > > At 01:20 AM 2/15/00 -0600, you wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> It is impossible to demonstrate something has no risk.
> > > > >
> > > > >Because . . . (?) few (if any) objects or activities have no risk.
> > > >
> > > > No, it's because you can't prove a negative. For example, let's have
> you
> > > > prove that did not rob a bank yesterday. Identify every bank that you
> > > > didn't rob, the witnesses that saw you not rob them, and the FBI
> report
> > > > identifying all the fingerprints that aren't yours.
> > > >
> > > > You really can't prove a negative.
> > > >
> > > > And this is the environment in which the nuclear industry is required
> to
> > > > operate. The highly visible and vocal opposition demands that the
> industry
> > > > be eradicated because it cannot prove that it isn't killing people.
> The
> > > > opposition can't prove that it IS killing people, but they don't seem
> to
> > > > feel there's any reason why they should - they are very comfortable
> with
> > > > the idea that it's the industry's obligation to prove they don't.
> > >
> > > And, whenever you have a discussion on this subject, be sure the ground
> rules
> > > are established before the main discussion begins. I was sandbagged one
> day
> > > when I was to discuss the hazards of plutonium. I was under the
> impression
> > > that those people on the side of "plutonium is the most dangerous
> material on
> > > earth" had to prove their argument. It turned out that I was expected
> to
> > > prove "plutonium is not the most dangerous material on earth." But no
> one
> > > told me that beforehand. So, of course I lost. The moderator even told
> me
> > > afterward what I was expected to do. I was incensed, but it was too
> late
> > > then. I learned a good lesson from that mistake.
> > >
> > > > How
> > > > convenient. It's a pity we have a press that can't figure this out.
> And as
> > > > long as the press don't get wise to this technique, the opposition
> will be
> > > > far more effective at scaring people than we ever will be at undoing
> this
> > > > damage.
> > > >
> > > > But the question remains, how do we change this?
> > >
> > > We use your example every time we hear or see someone try to tell us we
> must
> > > prove safety or no risk (absolutely impossible to do). If anyone else
> has a
> > > similar example, please post it. I will collect them for future use.
> The
> > > only way to change the current thinking is to provide thinking that is
> better
> > > and more truthful. The truth will out as the statement "You can't prove
> a
> > > negative" will eventually be understood and accepted (by most thinking
> people
> > > - the feelers will have a problem with it, of course) even by the EPA!
> It may
> > > take a while, but, if vigorously pursued, will win in the end.
> > >
> > > Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net
> > >
> > > --------------F5E29A2DE6C4764B3CA25210
> > > Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
> > > name="antatnsu.vcf"
> > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > Content-Description: Card for Al Tschaeche
> > > Content-Disposition: attachment;
> > > filename="antatnsu.vcf"
> > >
> > > begin:vcard
> > > n:Tschaeche;Al
> > > x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> > > org:Nuclear Standards Unlimited
> > > version:2.1
> > > email;internet:antatnsu@postoffice.pacbell.net
> > > title:CEO
> > > x-mozilla-cpt:;0
> > > fn:Al Tschaeche
> > > end:vcard
> > >
> > > --------------F5E29A2DE6C4764B3CA25210--
> > >
> > > ************************************************************************
> > > The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> > > information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> > information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> >
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html