[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Science-Technology Title: Leading warmist admits he was bamboozled by fear-mongers - on nuclear power Leading warmist admits he was bamboozled by fear-mongers - on nuclear power Thomas Lifson The original moonbat, George Monbiot, columnist for the left wing UK Guardian, now admits that he was bamboozled by fearmongers whipping up anti-nuclear fears. Over the last 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. I began to see the extent of the problem after a debate last week with Helen Caldicott. Dr Caldicott is the world's foremost anti-nuclear campaigner. She has received 21 honorary degrees and scores of awards, and was nominated for a Nobel peace prize. Like other greens, I was in awe of her. In the debate she made some striking statements about the dangers of radiation. So I did what anyone faced with questionable scientific claims should do: I asked for the sources. Caldicott's response has profoundly shaken me. Well, it's a start. Dr. Caldicott has been virtually sainted by the anti-nuclear movement, yet when Monbiot investigated her sources, he discovered that they were: ...nine documents: newspaper articles, press releases and an advertisement. None were scientific publications; none contained sources for the claims she had made. But one of the press releases referred to a report by the US National Academy of Sciences, which she urged me to read. I have now done so - all 423 pages. It supports none of the statements I questioned; in fact it strongly contradicts her claims about the health effects of radiation. Monbiot remains one of the most hysterical wamrists, calling for "drastic action needed now" to combat the alleged dangers posed to our survival. The very same concerns expressed by thinkers like Charles Manson. Now that Monbiot's eyes have been opened to the machinations fraudsters, perhaps he would examine the hysterical and false predictions of climate refugees and other nonexistent dangers advanced by the charlatans pushing warmist doctrine, as well as the efforts to "hide the decline." Poster Comment: "She has received 21 honorary degrees and scores of awards, and was nominated for a Nobel peace prize." ........ That right there should have tipped off Monbiot about her being a kook, a self appointed academia and a dipstick.... but then again he lives on the same side of the fence she does...... Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest What doesn't change is the so called 'enviromentalists track record' related to their own predictions, going back five or more decades. They've never once been found 'correct'. Never. I hear you knockin...go back where you been.... #2. To: Badeye (#1) What doesn't change is the so called 'enviromentalists track record' related to their own predictions, going back five or more decades. Like the 50 million climate refugees we were supposed to have had by 2010..... "I love the 45 caliber M1911, I respect the 9MM M9 Beretta but I only carry a CZ for my own personal protection". Quote courtesy of Lt Col John Dean Cooper, recognized as the Father of Modern Handgunning #3. To: CZ82 (#0) The environmentalist movement has always been about pushing a communist agenda, with government regulating 'acceptable levels' of industry, growth, population expansion and eminent domain issues. The Green movement is Red. It always has been. Look at the loons who seek to make constituencies of flora and fauna and then seek to 'represent' them.
#4. To: Rudgear (#3) "The Green movement is Red. It always has been. Look at the loons who seek to make constituencies of flora and fauna and then seek to 'represent' them." Is it as crazy as making corporations individuals under the U.S. Constitution? Living things have a core, basic right to exist. They have a right to do so with the value they have for themselves not being ignored just because someone can make a dollar by ending their existence. Deep Ecology is a rational way to give all things living value. And all life should be protected. This is something that does not have a need to be tied to the ideology of the right, middle or left. Despite your tirade who's purpose is to for alleged guilt by association, which is exactly what the concept of McCarthyism is all about. #5. To: Ferret Mike (#4) Is it as crazy as making corporations individuals under the U.S. Constitution? That is nonsense Mike. Tell me where microsoft and GE vote at.
#6. To: Ferret Mike (#4) I'm talking about current reality and the reality that since the first Earth Day in 1970, not one prediction has ever materialized. What passes for environmentalism in the West is not practical stewardship of our natural wealth. Time after time we read stories of wildfires burning for extended periods. Not for lack of knowledge of what to intelligently do to avoid this, but because bureaucracies running the Interior Department will not allow logging, brush clearing or any other practical, intelligent husbandry. Private property has been hijacked under the ruse of protecting it. Where is the protection when the responsibility of care derived from ownership is run roughshod by an out of control government that only seeks to enrich itself. You can't tell me the government can efficiently manage the wilderness resources we have better than responsible, private sector owners? And don't give me the McCarthyism sucker punch. Now who is painting with a broad brush? If I came across as dismissive of entire sectors of the population, plenty of R's are into huckster environmentalism, too. My father was one of them.
#7. To: A K A Stone (#5) (Edited) Corporate personhood If you didn't know I was referring to a well known Supreme Court decision, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, you don't look to be well informed on the issue. And under the recent ruling ruling that campaign cash is free speech, corporations as individuals have the right to pour millions of dollars into elections to buy influence large enough to control the government. While people like you are standing at the door of your hen house guarding against communists, capitalists from corporations are inside stealing you blind and taking the clucks and eggs out the back door. #8. To: Ferret Mike (#7) Ok Mike
#9. To: Rudgear (#6) I disagree. I remember thinking how outlandish the world of the 1970 movie Soylent Green with it's gutted to death world environment seemed when I first saw it. I watched it recently and it was shocking to see how much further the world is toward a tipping point where another mass extinction will occur. It made me realize how we all are like frogs in water being brought to a boil on this issue. I look around and see much evidence as to why the way we do things environmentally don't work. But the damage happens so slowly, it's easier for people to adopt will full of blissful ignorance on the topic and cover it up with lame excuses. #10. To: Ferret Mike (#9) I am for intelligent stewardship by private sector groups with a stake in success. Not the government, with no stake in success. In fact, they would love to fail so they can tighten controls. I don't want my government to control me. I want it to serve me and my descendants, as envisioned in the Constitution.
#11. To: A K A Stone (#5) Tell me where microsoft and GE vote at. They vote before elections with their free speech dollars, and after elections with their lobbyists. The Republican budget goes after children and the poor. Courage would be going after defense and the rich. Bill Maher #12. To: CZ82 (#2) Like the 50 million climate refugees we were supposed to have had by 2010..... Or oceans devoid of all life by 2000. Or depleting of all know oil reserves by 2000. Or mass starvation by 2000. The list documenting enviromentalists being nothing by shrieking reactionary fools given to drama is almost endless. The list documenting where they've actually been correct? There isn't one. I hear you knockin...go back where you been.... Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|