Anti Nuke Hypocrisy

["Vincent A King/KINGVA/CC01/INEEL/US" <KINGVA@INEL.GOV>]

As always, an excellent statement of valid points by Mr. Farber.



It exposes the hypocrisy of the anti-nuclear mentality for what it is -

political posturing by groups that want to APPEAR concerned for the welfare

of the environment and humanity.  It doesn't matter that not a single life

would be saved if they had their way, or that, in fact, lives would

actually be lost, as Mr. Farber and others have pointed out.  It's all

about image: as long as they can view themselves as "crusaders," they're

happy; as long as others see them as "good guys," their work is done.  Why

go to any extra trouble to actually THINK about the real results of their

demands? It's easier to sit back and take pot-shots at those who are

actively trying to develop technologies to help humankind, and more fun to

invent witty slogans, bumper stickers, and posters.



Ironically, although they portray nuclear supporters as "owned" by the

industry, it's the anti-nukes who concentrate on the spin game and whose

positions are dictated by political correctness instead of hard-nosed,

factual analysis.  (For me, the image comes to mind of shallow, "good old

boy" politicians.  I'm sure they would be "shocked and outraged.")



The comment "why irradiate the poor beans?" is a perfect example of why

reasoned discussion doesn't work in dealing with these groups:  they don't

see a morally neutral technology with controllable risks that can be used

to benefit mankind.  Their views are based on the old Disney

"genie-out-of-the-bottle" imagery, and they see radiation, and anything or

anyone associated with it, as an evil that must be wiped out.  The fact

that radiation and nuclear processes (e.g., solar energy) are as natural

and ubiquitous in our environment as anything else eludes them.



Vincent King,

Idaho Falls





*******************************************************************************

Stewar Farber wrote:



...Many antinuclear groups like to claim to be protecting public health

while their actions end up resulting in excess morbidity and mortality when

risker alternative technologies are employed, or actions are not taken

which need to be taken for the greater good.



The pro and anti nuclear technologies "debate" isn't just an academic

exercise. Real people die or are malnourished when food fails to reach

hungry people in the third world...



Stewart Farber



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/