This Josef dude is one of the overly confident/underly prudent types. As an example that Josef suffers from this dangerous deficit, he put his name to a document saying nothing bad will happen. Since then, reactors 1-3 have been exposed to explosions, a spent fuel pool is probably exposed to the air, and reactor 4 building is reportedly on fire. The news is no longer talking about micro-sieverts, it's now milli-sieverts. The evacuation zone has been expanded to 30 km, and NHK is describing what to and what not to do. For example, if you have laundry outside, leave it and don't bring it in. Turn off all ventilation equipment, etc. etc.
Josef Oehlmen is the acme of hubris, and thanks to the web, that's exactly how he will be remembered, which is a fair and proper consequence of his personality flaws.
Really? Now there is fire in reactor 4, as well as the explosions in one through three, the evacuation zone is being extended to 30 km, and radiation levels are going up.
At least 15 people have been admitted to hospital with symptoms of radiation poisoning after a devastating earthquake damaged Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant, Kyodo news agency said on Sunday.
At least 22 people are known to have been exposed to radiation and were being treated in hospital; Japanâ(TM)s nuclear and industrial safety agency said that as many as 160 people may have been exposed.
Deserts may be interesting ecosystems demonstrating that life is hardy, but in terms of value, rainforests, boreal forests, even grasslands, lock up much more carbon and release much more O2. So ultimately, deserts are simply not as valuable as forests or grasslands, and can never hope to be.
Probably the most damaging evidence against nuclear power is its supporters who seem to have an excess of confidence and deficit of prudence. Such people are dangerous and rational people everywhere recognize them as such.
To bring in the car analogy, you don't need to be a racing expert to know it's a bad idea to ride around with stunting teen driver whose confidence exceeds reality, anymore than you need a degree in nuclear physics to know that those who claim everything is absolutely safe and nothing bad can ever happen are probably being similarly reckless.
Part of the problem the nuclear industry has is people just like Dr. Oehmen who seem to have a extreme confidence but then say things that don't make sense.
For example, at one point he says that the cooling system failed because onsite generators were flooded, so they operated on battery power till they could get some portable generators moved to the site and operating. OK so far. Then he says that once they got the portable generators there, they couldn't use them because they came with the wrong plugs. (!) WTF -- chop the plugs and receptacles off and wire the damn things together directly.
After that he says stuff like only radioactive nitrogen was in the steam and it decays in seconds. OK -- so why are people being admitted to the hospital with radiation sickness? Maybe because there was a release of cesium?
He concludes that the system is totally safe and nothing bad can possibly happen.
It is people like this who cause our problems because they allow confidence to overcome foresight.
Absolutely there is some irony and there is an understanding of this expressed in Anonymous' letter, but it seems pretty thin (though long winded), and boils down to something like, "we are proponents of free speech, but we don't like the ideas you espouse or the way you express them, so we oppose _your_ speech."
For freedom of speech to work, unsavory speech must be protected. Indeed, it is bottling up unsavory speech, that makes it so dangerous.
Anyway, this is Anonymous' reason not protecting speech:
Being such aggressive proponents for the Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Information as we are, we have hitherto allowed you to continue preaching your benighted gospel of hatred and your theatrical exhibitions of, not only your fascist views, but your utter lack of Christ-like attributes. You have condemned the men and women who serve, fight, and perish in the armed forces of your nation; you have prayed for and celebrated the deaths of young children, who are without fault; you have stood outside the United States National Holocaust Museum, condemning the men, women, and children who, despite their innocence, were annihilated by a tyrannical embodiment of fascism and unsubstantiated repugnance. Rather than allowing the deceased some degree of peace and respect, you instead choose to torment, harass, and assault those who grieve.
Your demonstrations and your unrelenting cascade of disparaging slurs, unfounded judgments, and prejudicial innuendos, which apparently apply to every individual numbered amongst the race of Man - except for yourselves - has frequently crossed the line which separates Freedom of Speech from deliberately utilizing the same tactics and methods of intimidation and mental & emotional abuse that have been previously exploited and employed by tyrants and dictators, fascists and terrorist organizations throughout history.
How many victims would Dahmer have to eat before god figures out he's a bad dude? I would think any reasonably intelligent god could figure it out after two human meals (who knows -- the first one might have been some kind of mistake, but coming back for seconds...).
God either all powerful and responsible for evil either directly or by not doing anything about it (which makes god as good as satan), or not all powerful and just a big blowhard trying to get everything to think he is. Either way, if god existed, he isn't worthy of me.
Atheist fundamentalists -- all three of them? 1.6% of US citizens describe themselves as atheist ( http://religions.pewforum.org/reports ). Most atheists are "live and let live" type people having been at the wrong end of religious discrimination for just about ever. Newer atheists tend to be noisier, but that fades.
Anyway, let's be generous and say 10% of atheists are "fundamentalists" (probably more like 1% or less). That means with a 300m population, the US, there would be 480,000 militant atheists. Compared to the 78,000,000 evangelicals, I think the bible bangers have nothing to fear from those damned atheists.
Christians with a persecution complex: that's like Bill Gates feeling poor.
I'm an atheist. Never felt the need to vandalize a nativity -- never even think much about nativity scenes unless one is right there in front of me, and then I just critique the quality of the representations (there are lots of lame decorations in the world). Anyway, I doubt atheists are mostly responsible -- a much more likely source of vandalism, antagonism (war and death camps) is other competing religions.
We have complete need of this information. We live in a representative democracy. In order to fulfill our half of the obligation that entails, we need to know what government does and who does it so that we can take appropriate action at the ballot box. When the government only lies, we are deprived of our ability and right to choose our leaders for rational reasons. Wikileaks is the best thing to happen to America since the Revolution.
Great post. As an example of the broad spectrum within libertarianism, I consider myself a green libertarian -- fiscally conservative, socially liberal, but cognizant that the environment is important to the well being of all people. As for why people attack libertarians so viciously, I wish I could understand what that is all about.
Tyranny? Don't go pretending that Democrats aren't tyrants.
Obama asserts the right to execute American citizens without any kind of trial, charges, or judicial oversight based on nothing but allegations, i.e., Obama says your are a terrorist -- you get murdered and don't get a chance to defend yourself. Look up Amendments 4-6.
Closing Gitmo? Not. But worse, since the procedures at Gitmo have been declared unconstitutional, Obama is merely shifting operations to Bagram, as if the place in which one denies Habeas Corpus is of such great import: http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/05/no-habeas-at-bagram/
Is this all businesses or only those over a certain threshold? I can see pretty adverse unintended consequences of the paid maternity leave for a small business with only three or four workers. If I was in Norway with a business that small, I simply wouldn't hire women because it would be murder to pay someone for a year and get no work from them, particularly when the already small staff wouldn't be able to pick up the slack. Alternatively, I just wouldn't start a small business, which would allow large corps to basically monopolize things.
Slashdot Mirror
This Josef dude is one of the overly confident/underly prudent types. As an example that Josef suffers from this dangerous deficit, he put his name to a document saying nothing bad will happen. Since then, reactors 1-3 have been exposed to explosions, a spent fuel pool is probably exposed to the air, and reactor 4 building is reportedly on fire. The news is no longer talking about micro-sieverts, it's now milli-sieverts. The evacuation zone has been expanded to 30 km, and NHK is describing what to and what not to do. For example, if you have laundry outside, leave it and don't bring it in. Turn off all ventilation equipment, etc. etc.
Josef Oehlmen is the acme of hubris, and thanks to the web, that's exactly how he will be remembered, which is a fair and proper consequence of his personality flaws.
Really? Now there is fire in reactor 4, as well as the explosions in one through three, the evacuation zone is being extended to 30 km, and radiation levels are going up.
Hubris == "nothing could possibly go wrong".
All you have to do is wait three hours. Now it's 3 explosions and 1 fire.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Radiation-poisoning-patients-on-the-rise-in-Japan/Article1-672852.aspx
http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2011/mox_reactor_coolant_loss
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/japan/110313/japan-tsunami-earthquake
Deserts may be interesting ecosystems demonstrating that life is hardy, but in terms of value, rainforests, boreal forests, even grasslands, lock up much more carbon and release much more O2. So ultimately, deserts are simply not as valuable as forests or grasslands, and can never hope to be.
Probably the most damaging evidence against nuclear power is its supporters who seem to have an excess of confidence and deficit of prudence. Such people are dangerous and rational people everywhere recognize them as such.
To bring in the car analogy, you don't need to be a racing expert to know it's a bad idea to ride around with stunting teen driver whose confidence exceeds reality, anymore than you need a degree in nuclear physics to know that those who claim everything is absolutely safe and nothing bad can ever happen are probably being similarly reckless.
Part of the problem the nuclear industry has is people just like Dr. Oehmen who seem to have a extreme confidence but then say things that don't make sense.
For example, at one point he says that the cooling system failed because onsite generators were flooded, so they operated on battery power till they could get some portable generators moved to the site and operating. OK so far. Then he says that once they got the portable generators there, they couldn't use them because they came with the wrong plugs. (!) WTF -- chop the plugs and receptacles off and wire the damn things together directly.
After that he says stuff like only radioactive nitrogen was in the steam and it decays in seconds. OK -- so why are people being admitted to the hospital with radiation sickness? Maybe because there was a release of cesium?
He concludes that the system is totally safe and nothing bad can possibly happen.
It is people like this who cause our problems because they allow confidence to overcome foresight.
Anonymous should review the ACLU's defense of Nazis in the Skokie case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie
For freedom of speech to work, unsavory speech must be protected. Indeed, it is bottling up unsavory speech, that makes it so dangerous.
Anyway, this is Anonymous' reason not protecting speech:
Exactly how smelly did it make you?
The "reaonable salary" thing being the key. Why is $1/yr a reasonable salary for Jobs but $24k/yr not a reasonable salary for the CPA?
You mean "no incidents like this excluding those involving underworld characters."
-- Nagasaki mayor dies after being shot: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18151200/
Or "no incidents like this excluding those involving edged weapons."
-- 6 knifed to death in Britain in a 24 hour period: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1034472/SIX-stabbed-death-just-24-hours-Blade-Britains-knife-epidemic-spirals-control.html
How many victims would Dahmer have to eat before god figures out he's a bad dude? I would think any reasonably intelligent god could figure it out after two human meals (who knows -- the first one might have been some kind of mistake, but coming back for seconds ...).
God either all powerful and responsible for evil either directly or by not doing anything about it (which makes god as good as satan), or not all powerful and just a big blowhard trying to get everything to think he is. Either way, if god existed, he isn't worthy of me.
Careful -- if god is responsible for everything, doesn't that make him an evil fuck-wad?
Only because the constitution hasn't totally been shredded yet. Wait 25 years.
Atheist fundamentalists -- all three of them? 1.6% of US citizens describe themselves as atheist ( http://religions.pewforum.org/reports ). Most atheists are "live and let live" type people having been at the wrong end of religious discrimination for just about ever. Newer atheists tend to be noisier, but that fades.
Anyway, let's be generous and say 10% of atheists are "fundamentalists" (probably more like 1% or less). That means with a 300m population, the US, there would be 480,000 militant atheists. Compared to the 78,000,000 evangelicals, I think the bible bangers have nothing to fear from those damned atheists.
Christians with a persecution complex: that's like Bill Gates feeling poor.
I'm an atheist. Never felt the need to vandalize a nativity -- never even think much about nativity scenes unless one is right there in front of me, and then I just critique the quality of the representations (there are lots of lame decorations in the world). Anyway, I doubt atheists are mostly responsible -- a much more likely source of vandalism, antagonism (war and death camps) is other competing religions.
We have complete need of this information. We live in a representative democracy. In order to fulfill our half of the obligation that entails, we need to know what government does and who does it so that we can take appropriate action at the ballot box. When the government only lies, we are deprived of our ability and right to choose our leaders for rational reasons. Wikileaks is the best thing to happen to America since the Revolution.
What -- you haven't already? Kinda behind the times aren't you?
This needs to be condensed to a bumper sticker.
Great post. As an example of the broad spectrum within libertarianism, I consider myself a green libertarian -- fiscally conservative, socially liberal, but cognizant that the environment is important to the well being of all people. As for why people attack libertarians so viciously, I wish I could understand what that is all about.
Tyranny? Don't go pretending that Democrats aren't tyrants.
Obama asserts the right to execute American citizens without any kind of trial, charges, or judicial oversight based on nothing but allegations, i.e., Obama says your are a terrorist -- you get murdered and don't get a chance to defend yourself. Look up Amendments 4-6.
Read: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/10/02/assassinations/index.html
Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JojnYXRrBaI
Don't ask don't tell: Obama fulfilled his duty to defend the law in court and lost. He could have left it there, but chose to appeal. You can't blame that on obstructionist republicans because you just don't accidentally file an appeal and republicans can neither further nor hinder the decision to appeal. http://jonathanturley.org/2010/10/20/obama-administration-loses-effort-to-block-injunction-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-announces-appeal-to-reverse-victory-over-dadt/
Then of course there is the refusal to prosecute the illegal wiretapping of the previous administration, but rather to immunize the evildoers: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/01/obama-sides-wit/
Closing Gitmo? Not. But worse, since the procedures at Gitmo have been declared unconstitutional, Obama is merely shifting operations to Bagram, as if the place in which one denies Habeas Corpus is of such great import: http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/05/no-habeas-at-bagram/
Obama uses the state secrets doctrine to prevent civil lawsuits against American companies complicit in the plaintiffs' torture under Bush's rendition program: http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2010/09/suit_alleging_cia_torture_dism.html
Haven't fusion reactors been built already but have simply used more energy than they produced?
No time to google when shooting for FP.
Great then. A big win for mega-businesses and monopolies.
Is this all businesses or only those over a certain threshold? I can see pretty adverse unintended consequences of the paid maternity leave for a small business with only three or four workers. If I was in Norway with a business that small, I simply wouldn't hire women because it would be murder to pay someone for a year and get no work from them, particularly when the already small staff wouldn't be able to pick up the slack. Alternatively, I just wouldn't start a small business, which would allow large corps to basically monopolize things.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1311208/Here-news-I-quit-Norwegian-radio-reporter-walks-minute-rant-air.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
cute.