{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
[This group has been deleted]
View Entire Topic
This thread is inspired by another: view original post
12/6/2013 1:49:40 AM
5
In regards to nuclear paranoia
Why, in the age of the internet where information is readily available, does the general public still have a fear of nuclear anything that goes beyond insanity?
When a plane breaks while in use and causes the death of hundreds of people, how does the general public react?
"Oh that;s sad, but they'll work out what went wrong a fix it"
But when a nuclear reactor has even the slightest problem (and no one gets killed)?
"BAN NUCLEAR THINK OF THE CHILDKIDS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
For reference, no one has died from the fukushima meltdown, and very few people have gotten serious radiation issues, and that's from a powerplant that is several decades old - I would call that an amazing feat of human engineering, and yet governments are breaking their backs trying to ban anything related to nuclear ""
English
#Offtopic
-
Edited by Bolt: 12/6/2013 2:00:42 AMA combination of poor education with regards to nuclear physics, and more legitimate fears due to the ease with which governments have covered-up accidents in the past. I actually did the 5%/Sv in class today for the Fukushima residents. Using LNT at an average dose of 3.2mrem (a huge overestimate because LNT isn't applicable below 10mrem (no evidence of cancer in the data whatsoever) and also an overestimate because 3.2mrem was the max projected dose to any one person), I came up with 2 incidences of cancer for the entire population. Considering this is a population of 10,000+ people, this is something you could never separate from background incidents of cancer (which affects 40% of us in our lifetimes).
