Greenpeace calendar

I've been making some improvements, replacing some rather evasive responses. But I got to thinking, is it really any good as part of the site? I started work on it when I first started decided to make the site. Since then, things have moved on and I'm not sure if there is really any point to it. It was a one off piece by GP and attacking it specifically might be perceived as selective observation.

On the other hand, it does reference some real world events, which are perhaps worth addressing. But then this could be counterproductive because the point is that overall, the nuclear industry is one of the safest around, despite all the speculative FUD put around by the mean people (and there are so many mean people out there). Trying to rationalise each and every event can end up back firing as people look at all these incidents and think there is a problem, while failing to realise that stuff happens all the time everywhere and it is the big picture you have to look at.

It is worth keeping?

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines

I get a 'Page Not Found' error when I click the link.

Perhaps you've already made a decision?

__________________
"It was a crime of passion! Not premeditated dentistry!"

Should work now.

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines

Well, it's clear you definitely put a lot of work into it.

True enough, but if no one takes issue with their disengenuous claims, then some might begin to think that nuclear power is unsafe. For that reason alone, I think you should keep it.

__________________
"It was a crime of passion! Not premeditated dentistry!"

I think its worth it because some people will have encountered the calendar and may be thinking well this freedom for fission site says somethings but look green peace can tell me on virtually every day there has been some horrific accident with nuclear power. If the claims go unchallenged by anyone for long enough then they gain some sort of truth in some peoples minds.

I'd drop it and find some other endeavor more worth your time for several reasons:

1. Nuclear energy is a widely accepted and extremely safe form of energy around the world, enjoying far fewer accidents/injury/death per megawatt than any other form of energy known to mankind.

2. Even Greenpeace leaders, once having been educated, are now embracing nuclear energy, particularly in light of the greenhouse gas-emitting coal, oil, and gas-fired power plants still in production: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041401209.html

On the other hand, the Greenpeace society, long brainwashed into thinking without the facts remains staunchly opposed (it's called "dogma"): http://www.greenpeace.org/internatio...paigns/nuclear

Who's right? Well, I think the facts speak for themselves, and am dang glad those facts are readily available on the Internet so that no one is without excuse!

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol. A human.

Whoever says "perception is reality" is daft. It's merely an abstraction, and often not a very good one.

That's it. I'm getting rid of it. Maybe it will return later, but for now it is dumped. It is too much work to keep up with Greenpeace's pendantic hysteria over "technical failures". I seem to be giving stock responses loads of times and most of them are about VVERs and RBMKs. It's tedious. I will nevertheless address the overall content on the safety page, but I don't think there is any point in subjected myself or my readers to having to wade through all their irrelevant crap.

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines

I read over your site again just now and it's quite cool. Keep what you got! By "dropping" it I wasn't suggesting you get rid of it. It's great reference tool. Doesn't mean that you have to debunk their every claim. If even a fraction are totally out to lunch, it casts a lot of doubt as to their other claims.

Again, the work you've so far is good.

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol. A human.

Whoever says "perception is reality" is daft. It's merely an abstraction, and often not a very good one.

I would also vote against removing it. I thought it entertaining, and enraging, to read . Another reason is a generic dislike for removing web resources. Rather add a note at the top of each page, saying it is no longer supported or something.

"Widely accepted" by whom? I've talked with many people uneducated on the subject.

One man from England I talked with. I talked about the idea of nuclear reactors being common. His responce:

"And we'll all turn into irradiated mutants!!"

Many people are ignorant; the educated are not as ignorant, by definition -- but guess who is in the majority, and thus, have the better ability to, say, vote?

__________________
"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." -- Thomas Paine

Being intelligent is not a felony. But most societies evaluate it as at least a misdemeanor. -- Heinlein

Creationists make it sound as though a "theory" is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. -- Isaac Asimov

I'm not sure I agree with you. Most of the people I've talked with US and abroad are ok with it. Some concerns, but they don't hear about accidents in the paper or thousands dying, so they're ok with it.

So, "most people" = "widely accepted." It's safety goes without question for the educated as they're able to separate fact and fiction.

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol. A human.

Whoever says "perception is reality" is daft. It's merely an abstraction, and often not a very good one.

I dunno, many people I've talked with aren't okay with it. I'd rather not rely on anecdotes, and see some actual scientific surveys.

__________________
"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." -- Thomas Paine

Being intelligent is not a felony. But most societies evaluate it as at least a misdemeanor. -- Heinlein

Creationists make it sound as though a "theory" is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. -- Isaac Asimov

Keep it. Something like that is handy to have around even if it's just archival. Plus, you never know when they'll trot out that calendar to the forefront again. You also never know when the mood for self-punishment might hit and you could revisit it and do some improvements.

When I read through the piece, I kept thinking it would be nice to have the hard facts of the incidents, rather than just the statment that Greenpeace didn't give enough info (although it is enough to discredit their argument). That would be really hard, and perhaps pointless, work, but anyway.

You've hit it there.

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines

All in all, an excellent, rational, fact-based rebuttal to all those guilt-by-association claims. Don't get down on yourself, you're doing good work.

One thing I noticed that probably could use revision is the repeated reference to the Savannah River Site as a munitions plant. It might have been to a certain extent during the 1950s through the 1970s, but then it became a D&D, reclamation, and waste stabilization facility, with an active role in supplying fuel material for NASA RTGs. The tritium part still exists, but doesn't have the predominant role it did decades earlier.

I know, I worked there as an engineer during the 1990s. I used to drive through crowds of Greenpeace protesters to get to work. Their methods are the big lie and the aforementioned "guilt by association". One could be sure if an SRP worker died of a heart attack, Greenpeace would report it as "Nuclear worker dies suddenly while in reactor building!"

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Certainly there's another site out there which has the details you need?

Like this: http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key...ents/index.htm

Although fairly detailed, though, it's still on what appears to be a "no-nukes" site.

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol. A human.

Whoever says "perception is reality" is daft. It's merely an abstraction, and often not a very good one.

It looks like everyone wants it to stay, but I don't feel it is important enough to be worth the effort as a point by point debunking, particularly given the repetitive nature of it.

However, I have done a more general debunking. It is tedious to do it bit by bit, but as a whole, it is certainly worth comment.

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines