tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post2585068476155721171..comments2024-03-07T02:00:01.582-05:00Comments on NEI Nuclear Notes: Why We Need to Keep a Level Head About the Nuclear Butterflies from FukushimaUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-70448932230671462112012-08-18T10:47:28.192-04:002012-08-18T10:47:28.192-04:00Re: http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120809/srep005...Re: http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120809/srep00570/full/srep00570.html<br /><br />NEI, let's hear a peep!jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624023124404414596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-85922035880844848122012-08-17T17:39:56.642-04:002012-08-17T17:39:56.642-04:00Just read a newspaper article in a Japanese newspa...Just read a newspaper article in a Japanese newspaper this weekend. Lots of anti-Nuclear sentiment, but the most surprising things is that one of the arguements against nuclear power is "the release of CO2 into the environment".<br /><br />Really? That is some fine scientific reasoning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-91216485190383071772012-08-17T14:12:56.187-04:002012-08-17T14:12:56.187-04:00Good science is reproducible. If there were sever...Good science is reproducible. If there were several independent studies with some quantifiable liekert-type measures such that standard deviations and variances could be determined then the report may have weight. Too much of the science world postulates or hypothesizes wild notions with very little supporting data. Maybe they have a likely hypothesis, but they need to collect the data, do the experiments and then draw their conclusions. Sample size does mean something and measuring methods must be determined and agreed upon. A few photographs are weak evidence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-54542378270832291172012-08-17T12:50:54.791-04:002012-08-17T12:50:54.791-04:00Please note this butterfly has a large abdomen and...Please note this butterfly has a large abdomen and wrinkled wings. Do you not remember Bio-101, where butterflies fresh from the chrysalis pump body fluids into their wings to expand them? It looks like this specimen was deliberately collected during that process and mounted to show a desired effect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-28775195108416564582012-08-17T03:14:17.126-04:002012-08-17T03:14:17.126-04:00Thanks Ralph for the objective assessment and link...Thanks Ralph for the objective assessment and link. If you could put the reports of increased thyroid cysts into perspective too that would be awesome.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-9628749345289829722012-08-16T18:32:59.276-04:002012-08-16T18:32:59.276-04:00Here is a link to the editorial review board:
htt...Here is a link to the editorial review board:<br /><br />http://www.nature.com/srep/eap-ebm/index.html#earthenvironment<br /><br />You can't just fabricate that they are anti-nuke because you don't like the outcome of the study.<br /><br />Joffan - well thought out response.TheHealthPhysicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05060756659263075467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-51748594791230072822012-08-16T18:05:58.658-04:002012-08-16T18:05:58.658-04:00Bob thinks his defiant opinion counts as a rebutta...Bob thinks his defiant opinion counts as a rebuttal, but it doesn't. Joffanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18025437863119781181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-83566630254809470872012-08-16T17:28:05.993-04:002012-08-16T17:28:05.993-04:00By peer-review I don't mean by another green g...By peer-review I don't mean by another green group which is like foxes in a henhouse trading forks. It'd like to see a major university or renown international institute with no nuke axes to grind do a true and professional peer review. <br />After viewing videos of that tsunami scouring villages and coastal towns, carrying far inland a soup of garbage, sludge, gasoline, farm and industrial chemicals and pesticides and raw sewage, it would take a whooper for me not to believe that toxic brew at the least mutagenic. That the study breezed the possibility off so blithely alone makes it a suspect nuke hatchet job. They're not going to resettle chemical imbued superfund sites like Love Canal here for a while and they are non-atomic -- and curiously unpublicized, unlike mildly irradiated nuke sites, so it'll be interesting how Japan deals with land once saturated by a toxic wave. Will nuclear prejudice be in tow? <br /><br />James Greenidge<br />Queens NY<br />jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624023124404414596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-74209937542225887052012-08-16T17:00:10.266-04:002012-08-16T17:00:10.266-04:00jim thinks the paper wasn't peer-reviewed, but...jim thinks the paper wasn't peer-reviewed, but it was. donb thinks the science in the report is suspect, but it isn't. The whole point of the study went over the head of the NuclearDiner blogger, who fixated on the May data and a single value of a radiation level (as if a city has radiation at a single level).TheHealthPhysicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05060756659263075467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-79362900555211326372012-08-16T15:11:34.593-04:002012-08-16T15:11:34.593-04:00Jim, what's your peer-reviewed reference that ...Jim, what's your peer-reviewed reference that demonstrates that "toxic tsunamis flooding towns and habitats" are responsible for deformed butterflies? Isn't that just a "popped up conclusion" on your part?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-11467609226254163062012-08-16T13:44:58.467-04:002012-08-16T13:44:58.467-04:00Do you know Mark Twain mentioned two headed turtle...Do you know Mark Twain mentioned two headed turtles and six legged toads and other such freak creatures? Which nuclear plant did he live near, I wonder?..<br /><br />It’s up to the researcher to do his homework and investigate all possibilities before popping up a conclusion, and omitting prominent factors like toxic tsunamis flooding towns and habitats — which isn’t even considered in this butterfly study, simply means they’re looking for a fast and easy blame toward nuclear plants via radiation effects. If they weren’t sure they should’ve called a peer review instead going public with an assumption designed to further scare the frightened. I would let the chips fall where they may if a separate institution with no axes to grind confirmed this study.<br /><br />This is a prime example why the nuclear profession/industry desperately needs to create a media/web FUD-busting 911 agency to immediately pounce and question nearly indelible wildfire assertions like this.<br /><br />James Greenidge<br />Queens NYjimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624023124404414596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-83570278183492520422012-08-16T13:38:08.848-04:002012-08-16T13:38:08.848-04:00The science in the report is suspect. Here is some...The science in the report is suspect. <a href="http://nucleardiner.com/archive/item/radioactive-mutant-butterflies-really" rel="nofollow">Here</a> is some analysis at NuclearDiner.donbnoreply@blogger.com