RoR: Forum

Post 100

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 7:18pm

Link

Edit

Vera,

In Mark's last response to you he wrote:

==============================
I also like your criticism of the contemporary narcissistic attitude that whatever one wants one is (somehow) entitled to.
==============================

Because I can't help it, I noted a contradiction here: Jason has made the argument that you possess an attitude (calling it an esthetic attitude) that "whatever [you want] [you are] (somehow) entitled to." If, on the one hand, you hold the criticism Mark mentioned above; but, on the other hand, you feel entitled to cleaner air, less nuclear risk, etc -- then there's a contradiction.

Would you please comment on this idea of contradictory premises?

Ed

Post 101

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 8:06pm

Link

Edit

Robert - Teresa: you're both making valid points each from your very own personal perspective yet claiming that I should not cling to mine, without knowing to what extent my decisions were made based on the available options - and still boths of you avoid answering a simple logical rational question: how does your wonderful free society protect a single individual ... I probably know just as much about cosmic radiation and its influence in mutation on earth that created life in the first place and continues shaping life - I've been a 'banana-farmer' in the rainforest for one and a half years - I've lived in perfect peace with more inclement nature and deadly animals than your furry little friends - I've travelled to many countries looking for a place, not even safe, but at least empty enough not to have a city hall ... your admiration for the human race has made you blind to its threats - you demand proof of those threats and when delivered you tell me to adapt ... now I'm turning the tables on you: you prove to me that your free society will not hinder the full developement of a single individual - you prove to me that your free market will not endanger the life and well-being of a single individual - you prove to me that this nuclear reactor does not pose any risk to my measly little sensitive life ... if you can't, then I'll blame you for every headache, for every suffocation attack, for every nuclear desaster just waiting to happen - yes: you personally cause I don't give a damn about the millions you are hiding behind in the name of freedom ... as for turning tables - Robert: you certainly won't 'personally disagree' with an airforce combat training base next to your studio, will you? I'm sure Teresa can help you move to some nice quiet location near a radioactive garbage dump somewhere - I'll make sure there's no mutated cockroach hiding in it to threaten you - please forgive the flippant tone - I'm also serious!

Post 102

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 8:38pm

Link

Edit

Ed - thanx for the extensive research :-)
I'm missing the EU study though that claims to prove DNA damage in lab tests - seems to contradict several of your reports - so back to the question which expert is the expert of experts?
(here's the link to a German version http://www.umweltinstitut.org/frames/all/m401.htm - if you search Google (with a bad Chinese conscience) for these key-words 'eu mobile radiation dna' you'll find some English information on that topic)

as to your specific question:
I made a very clear distinction between my wanting to have an 'aesthetic attitude', not expecting an objectivist society to provide it - and wanting safety of health and life itself, which in the case of that nuclear reactor is threatened - as per free market credo I am entitled to defend myself against attacks on my health and life - or has that changed recently?

further to 'aesthetic attitude' I'd also claim that if I do manage to provide it for myself (which I have for the last few decades - thank you very much), no one is entitled to destroy it - or would it be OK for you if I dropped some black acid rain on your nice white house - it's not lethal - it just makes your house look a little yucky - but that's just your aesthetic sensibility - right? ... but I'm trying to keep the focus on the threat discussion or we'll continue wallowing in sensibilities - so let's try solving that one first - then I'm only too happy to start the 'mud-slinging' :-)

PS: three answers already and no one told me how free market will protect me from that damn reactor! don't tell me I have to crawl back to my government and beg them for air-space protection so no one will accidentally crash into it - last time one of their own fighters lost a missile and dropped it on a barn!

Post 103

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 8:54pm

Link

Edit

your admiration for the human race has made you blind to its threats - you demand proof of those threats and when delivered you tell me to adapt ... now I'm turning the tables on you: you prove to me that your free society will not hinder the full developement of a single individual - you prove to me that your free market will not endanger the life and well-being of a single individual - you prove to me that this nuclear reactor does not pose any risk to my measly little sensitive life ...

You want me to prove a negative, Vera? Guilty until proven innocent? Is that what you want? You're making the charge, it's up to you to prove your claims true.

Robert wasn't trying to insult you, and neither was I. He was trying to enlighten you, but you're clearly not interested. Getting defensive isn't necessary. No one's trying to hurt you.

The world is full of risks, and there is no free ticket out of that fact. There is no risk- free lifestyle. It doesn't exist, it's a fantasy. There is no Utopia.

I want to get back to another question/charge you've made:

and still boths of you avoid answering a simple logical rational question: how does your wonderful free society protect a single individual ...

From what? From yourself?

Example:
My neighbor loves flowers, and so do I, but flowers attract a lot of bees. I am allergic to bee stings, yet I cannot make my neighbor responsible for my weaknesses. They are my responsibility. No court would allow me to sue a bee attracting neighbor if I get stung.

Never would I think to suggest my neighbors stop growing their wonderful plants because the bees they attract may cause me harm. It's my body, and my responsibility, not my neighbors'.

Post 104

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 9:28pm

Link

Edit

Teresa - I was only answering both your posts in the same tone and using the same arguments you applied to mine - if indeed my post was offensive I apologise - I was merely using your own tactics in reverse - sounds to me you are getting more defensive than I did ... also you still keep coming with more new ambiguity examples - for all those who haven't got it yet:

VERA WANTS TO KNOW HOW A FREE MARKET IS PROTECTING HER FROM THAT DAMN REACTOR

that is not my weakness in the face of a nuclear explosion (nothing short of a cockroach will survive that), that is not a natural occuring desaster like a meteor collision (which would of course have mostly the same effect), it is not an offense to my sensibilities because it is an ugly building (I seldom get close enough to even see it clearly) - it is a man-made threat created through ignorance at best and incompetence at worst and its threat is perpetuated through sheer idiocy and I am of the very selfish opinion that I am allowed to defend myself against it - so please tell me if a free market as you envision would protect me from such a threat

as to answering more clearly your suggestion of moving: I have tried moving - not every country has the advantage of your space in the States and in Canada - and your countries are less than hospitable when it comes to immigrants - also I'm almost sure I remember the first nuclear reactor core-melt happened in America (or was that a near-melt?) - so where specifically would you like me to move? I tried the South American jungle as a farmer - ended up in jail because they have as little tolerance for 'leave me alone' as our developed countries seem to have

Post 105

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 9:37pm

Link

Edit

VERA WANTS TO KNOW HOW A FREE MARKET IS PROTECTING HER FROM THAT DAMN REACTOR

You're free to move if you're afraid of it. That's how the free market protects you.
If you're not able to move, that's not you're neighbor's problem. Your life, your problem.

I'm sorry your environment doesn't allow for more free space the way you'd like, however. We all have to make the best of what we're dealt. You could start applying for visas anyway. I'd enjoy having you here. :)

Is there some reason you're so afraid of that reactor? Has it been threatened in the past?

(Edited cause I hit the stupid post key by accident)

(Edited by Teresa Summerlee Isanhart on 1/28, 9:48pm)

Post 106

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:06pm

Link

Edit

Vera,

Ich spreche nur ein wenig Deutsche, aber ich werde ansprechen.

Ed

Post 107

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:32pm

Link

Edit

Vera,

========
I'm missing the EU study though that claims to prove DNA damage in lab tests - seems to contradict several of your reports ...
========

Vera, first of all, did you read my post 99 in its entirety? It mentions some noted effects of electromagnetic radiation (at or above 0.4 microTesla's) ...

========
For childhood leukemia, a doubling of risk has been associated with exposures above 0.3/0.4 microT.

... some biological effects on cell culture have been observed ...

We found that MWs from GSM mobile telephones affect chromatin conformation and 53BP1/gamma-H2AX foci similar to heat shock.

There is an association between childhood leukaemia and proximity of home address at birth to high voltage power lines, and the apparent risk extends to a greater distance than would have been expected from previous studies.
========

Also, the EU study (which you mention) has not been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed, scientific journal ...

========
The most recent news comes from the REFLEX study, a four-year project performed by twelve research groups in seven European countries, whose results were published online this month, although they have not yet appeared in a peer-reviewed journal. "We have found a mechanism that could cause chronic disease," concludes study leader Franz Adlkofer of Verum, a research organization based in Munich, Germany.

http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041220/pf/041220-6_pf.html
========

Unpublished research is problematic, at best, Vera. I will withhold comment on it until it is accepted by the peer-review process (by "official" science).

Ed

(Edited by Ed Thompson on 1/28, 10:33pm)

Post 108

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:33pm

Link

Edit

so what you are saying is that your idea of a free market would allow for the creation of any potentially destructive product or production-process and it would be my problem to get out of its reach?

I'm undecided how to best answer that statement - here's some variety:
1. thanx for my share but in that case I'm not intersted in buying into your free market - I'd rather become a terrorist than live the rest of my live at the mercy of some incompetent fools (not assuming that all producers are fools, but some of them are bound to be - certainly here in Germany)
2. great - I'll check out the market for some of that uranium waste they are constantly shipping to France - I'm sure you wouldn't mind if I brought some with me on my visit to your beautiful country - it only blows up in one out of hundred cases
3. I could grow some nice fungi like Clostridium Botulinum and if I'm careless enough to break their growth tanks on my transcontinental flight over the US they could wipe out the entire continent (they are nasty little buggers) - but why is your airport security so damn uptight about those little test-tubes in my bags?
4. I should stop worrying about armies and wars - why do they even spend so much money on weapons when they already have savvy enterpreneurs who can wipe out the earth for them?
5. I just can't wrap my mind around what you just said - but as you already stated: that's my problem!

atrocious puns aside - thanx for the invitation but I don't think I'd take it if your free economy, that the US is so famous for, allows for this kind of potential - I'd never know what kind of factory you live next to ;-)

as for the fear: I already said I'm not afraid of that reactor - I hardly think of it on a regular basis as I gave up years ago trying to get it shut down - that doesn't mean that I'm closing my mind to its destructive potential - it has not been threatened by any terrorist activities yet (at least what I know) - my major concern is that only fifty km west of it is an airport and I'm not too trusting a person when it comes to the flying skills of 'free marketers' ;-)

Post 109

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:40pm

Link

Edit

Vera,

================
I could grow some nice fungi like Clostridium Botulinum
================

Vera, Clostridium botulinum, the source of the popular cosmetic injection, Botox (botulinum toxin) -- the most poisonous compound known to man -- is a bacteria, not a fungus.

Ed
[just a nit-pick, really]

Post 110

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:46pm

Link

Edit

Ed - I have indeed read your post in its entirety, though I admit that I did not understand all of the technical details and implications in some of them - the study you mentioned sounded more like having biological effects through electromagnetic waves - what the EU study found is that GSM radiation causes DNA breakage at a level of 1.3 which is already lower than the allowed 2.0 here in Germany
the studies of REFLEX and the one I found in German are I think the same, headed by Adlkofer - publication in peer journals notwithstanding I'd still like to ask the same question:
which expert can I trust or does it have to be a group of experts to add credibility and make it 'official'?
to borrow from Atlas Shrugged again: the Stadler institute was noted for its reputation and still published some rather 'doubtful' papers - how does your avarage non-initiated non-expert decide?
PS: congrats on your German - I think these are the first German words I've read on Solo :-)

Post 111

Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:53pm

Link

Edit

' Clostridium botulinum is a bacteria, not a fungus. '
... right you are - seems I already found a competent partner to start international production ;-)

Post 112

Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 4:14am

Link

Edit

First of all, a nuclear reactor is not a nuclear bomb - that has been such a hoary old myth, yet many presume it to be true [and I know this from my first wife, who was a nuclear engineer, and read the textbooks on the subject myself, out of curiosity of what really was the truth]. The only reactor that was dangerous was the Chernobel one, which (1) was based on technology that was outdated even by when the first reactor went on line in Shippingport, waaaaaaay back in time, and (2) was built in a totalitarian society [USSR] which had no such regards for safety. The 'infamous' Three Mile Island affair was in fact proof that no matter what errors made on human part, all the safety measures worked just fine, and all containment was there.

Living near a coal mine is more dangerous to your health.

(Edited by robert malcom on 1/29, 4:17am)

Post 113

Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 5:13am

Link

Edit

you are ignoring the fact that this reactor has been declared unsafe by people very much like your first wife - I'm not arguing shutting down every nuclear reactor I'm arguing shutting down this particular one - and in that respect our 'enlightened' German government is in no way better the the former Soviet Union ... as for suggesting to move into a coal-mine: presenting a worse alternative does not make this alternative better - the additional flaw in that comparison is that I'm not arguing radioactive pollution compared to air pollution by the mine - I'm arguing instant nuclear destruction of half of Europe with even a minor accident like a private plane crashing into it - so what's your take? are you with Teresa on this one that it is my problem and I should get out of the way?

Post 114

Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 7:45am

Link

Edit

"I'm arguing instant nuclear destruction of half of Europe with even a minor accident like a private plane crashing into it - so what's your take?"

Half of Europe!? Is this a nuclear power plant or the "Doomsday Machine" from the movie Dr. Strangelove? :)

- Jason

Post 115

Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 8:32am

Link

Edit

for you Jason I'll pitch in the R&D reactor 40 km north of here - it uses weapons grade material :-)
bit better protected but can still be busted with a small fighter plane from the 30 km away air-force base ... so will you answer one question for the price of two - or is this not enough 'doomsday material' for your 'strange love'?

Post 116

Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 7:30am

Link

Edit

treat every individual as an individual:

and

I'd rather be on my own fighting the assholes in this world than having a government to protect me that would rather put me away in a very dark hole

Ditto!

gw