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?
gunter 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

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …