AN ASSAULT ON SCIENCE

I am just sadly shaking my head at how adults who are bright enough to get on and enjoy a discussion website still seems barely to have an eight grade earth science course understanding of the world.

I should have known the society as a whole was in trouble when they sharply dumb down Scientific American in the 90s as it would seems there was no longer enough of the population with the knowledge and interests to maintain it old standards.

Your last paragraph is not only silly, but unrealistic. Not everyone has any interest in science.

THREE MILE ISLAND, CHERNOBYL, FUKUSHIMA, and the associated areas for miles around them that are STILL UNSAFE FOR HUMANSTO LIVE yeards later. Go try to convince the Japanese it's a good idea, I dare you.

Let see no one at the plant or outside of the plant was harm at three mile island as the containment building did it job, next as far as Chernobyl it was a design from the 1950s without a containment shell of a type that was never use in the west even in the 50s for commerce plants. There is still such a plant that I think is still being used by the US government located in Washington state to product nuclear weapon grade plutonium but that is it ,as carbon rods control reactors are not safe. Footnote in order to created this disaster even with an inherently unsafe design the fools needed to disable all it safe guards to run some tests.

As far as the Japanese are concern building such reactors in an earthquake area by the sea without protecting the backup cooling systems from flooding is more then stupid.


Everything was fine after the quake until the batteries ran out and there was no working generators that got flooded once more due to poor design.

Some of the less harm reactors in any case had already been place back on line in Japan with the backup cooling systems that should had been in placed in the first place.

To sum up far more people had been harm and or kill by living downwind of coal plants then from the very few accidents that had occur with nuclear power.

I'm sure you're much smarter than the Japanese scientists that worked on that project. Just the simple fact that the Japanese understand earthquakes better than quacks like you!

Then you have no foundation to independently judge public issues such as global warming and are completely dependent on who the news media declare are experts.

My bet is that you never hear of chaos theory or that the founder of this now accepted branch of mathematics who had declare that climate models are not valid for predicting the future climate from any news media sources.

As the title of this thread support it is an attack on science to dare to questions those model predictions and such people are label deniers and judge to be ignorance of science.

Now my friend who here seems, in your opinion, to have more understandings and knowledge of the issues you or I independent of the 'experts'?

Your narrative sounds like you know me better than I do. I think people like you are called 'know it alls' and 'jerks.'

CI, your instincts are on target.

OK so the backup generators did not get flooded and when they begin to place some of the reactors back on line they did not take extra steps to prevent a similar happening as they was happy with their old design?

Next it was not the engineers who wish for the shuttle challenger to be launch in low temperature it was a decision force on the engineers by NASA management and both scientists and engineers do not normally have the final say in what is needed for a safe design.

I had not research the back story of the original design of those reactors backup systems but my best guess was that they was force to do the best they could given the project budget and they did not get all they wish for in regard to those systems.

Hmm did I not ask you many posts ago what background did you have in science, mathematics and computer modelings.

Perhaps I am wrong but I think you told me that you did not have such a background.

Am I getting you confused with another poster here and you do have such a background?

It might help if you provide your credentials.

Where had you been as I had indeed given my background with special note of my background in complex computer modeling of nonlinear systems.

Sure... I must have said that the center of the earth is having a change in climate.... Oh... wait.... no, I didn't.

You haven't told us what your evidence is that there has been no warming for 20 years. You haven't told us what your background is in climatology. You complained that others weren't using actual data points and then when you are asked for your data points you are unable to supply them.

That's because his background is complex computer modeling. That should have answered your q. LOL

My my you was the one using the term the whole earth and you was the one trying to apply the laws of thermodynamics to the earth as if it was a small black body object and not a major planet.

Now that game playing is over and we are now moving on to the earth temperate measurements?

It fun reading about the pause/slow down of global warming between 1998-2013 as: One the experts claimed that there was no slow down just errors in the temperate readings and after fudging sorry correcting those reading there is no pause/slow down after all: Two if you do not buy that well such pauses are not unknown and do not effect the overall upward trend.......footnote our newest climate models would had predicted this pause assuming it happen and not the result of recording errors meaning we had fudge our models to allowed for pauses.

Lord the whole field of climate change is full of pseudoscience and if anyone wish to get a good feel for this pseudoscience at full work go to the following link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus#Length_of_hiatus_in_relation_to_climate_models

Pray tell, where do you get your information on climate change?

Bill, would it be too much to ask that you add all the missing words to your response. I'm sorry, but I don't want to assume that the words I might pick would be appropriate. Right now, your response is unintelligible. I suppose it's possible that you might be skilled at something, I just can't tell by reading your response.

Bill just left out "complex English composition."

Yes, but Bless his heart, he finds complete sentences overwhelming.