Skip to main content

What Makes a Specialist?

Kevin Kamps, taking a tour of Australia to talk about the dangers of nuclear energy, is billing himself as a "nuclear waste specialist".

J.F. Beck is less than impressed:
Kamps is nothing more than an anti-nuclear activist with no real authority to speak to the weighty matter of nuclear energy. Despite this, the ABC gives him national coverage as a "nuclear waste specialist". Even worse, the Mackay Daily Mercury bills him as a "nuclear waste expert". With the MSN propagandizing for environmentalists it's no wonder people cringe at the mere mention of "nuclear".
Then again, for many of us, it's just another day at the office.

UPDATE: Time to add a new blog to your bookmarks: Nuclear Australia.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I have seen so many of these types of "specialists" in my lifetime, I want to throw up.

Did anyone email ABC news?

A fair share of the problem is how the media reports these things.

For years the New York Times, without any fact checking, printed the Nader canard about Plutonium being "the most dangerous substance known to man."

-NNadir
Joffan said…
Between self-proclaimed experts like Caldicott and deceptively named anti-nuclear orgs like the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, this MSM response is par for the course. No critical judgement applied.


MSN - the Main Stream Needier?
Anonymous said…
Hi,

What a mean spirited commentary...

You simply need to read Webster's definition of "specialist" as;

"one who devotes himself to a special occupation or brand of learning"

Tracking this dinosaur by its unmanaged droppings is a particular talent that Mr. Kamp's has indeed specialized in and obviously not so easily dismissed, especially by someone who wishes to remain "anonymous."

Gunter, NIRS
Anonymous said…
If you're not pro-nuclear, you can't be a specialist or develop expertise? This type of fallacious argument is known in logic theory as 'poisoning the well.'

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/poisoning-the-well.html
Anonymous said…
Actually if you're not pro-nuclear, it is almost certain that you are lacking in expertise.

The subject is about as "debatable" as evolution is debatable.

Unlike many people on this website, I started out in the anti-nuclear camp. In the process of "educating" myself about the supposed "drawbacks" of nuclear energy, I decided that the anti-nuclear position is purely absurd.

It really takes only a minimal science education to figure this out.

For instance, one can count. Suppose that in all his walking around talking to himself, Mr. Kemp was using his "expert" status to count dead bodies from people who have been killed by the storage of so called "nuclear waste." Let's count with him: Zero. Zero. Zero...

Now I will concede that Mr. Kemp has done zero work trying to notice anyone who may have been killed by dangerous fossil fuel waste - which is also known as "air pollution." Clearly he is inexpert as the issue of energy wastes, apparently from an arbitrary decision on his part to be indifferent to the subject.

There is a difference between education and re-inforcing one's dogma by the uncritical repetition of self-referential garbage. Mr. Kemp has not demonstrated any "expertise" whatsoever on the subject of so called "nuclear waste." An expert would be able to discuss the subject.

-NNadir
Anonymous said…
Wouldn't a blogger be nothing more than an authoritative "expert"?

Why should I believe the polar opposite of Mr. Kamps? You seem to be nothing more than an industry shill who sells materials that take millions of years to degrade to the public. Luckily there will be a small number of like-minded people to tell you how honorable you are and you won't have to worry about being in a fractional minority.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...