Thousands march as Japan shuts off nuclear power

http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-march-japan-shuts-off-nuclear-power-071425811--finance.html

Where is all the power going to come from when the world switches to electric vehicles?  Nuclear power is really the only "cleanest" way to meet the demand, isn't it?

Originally Posted By Theejl (5 MAY 2012 6:20pm)

Where is all the power going to come from when the world switches to electric vehicles?  Nuclear power is really the only "cleanest" way to meet the demand, isn't it?

I just want to know where Japan will get the 33 percent power lost from shutting down their reactors?  And what's that going to cost that ailing economy?

obviously, from natural gas and oil.

http://www.livescience.com/19466-climate-change-myths-busted.html

Originally Posted By Theejl (5 MAY 2012 6:20pm)

 Nuclear power is really the only "cleanest" way to meet the demand, isn't it?

It darn sure isnt the safest.  Safety and redundancy in nuclear power is an illusion.  IF that genie ever gets out of the bottle youve got a huge area no one will be able to live in for 5000 years.

Originally Posted By danlongman (6 MAY 2012 12:41pm)

http://www.livescience.com/19466-climate-change-myths-busted.html

Where's the link to the busted hockey stick, artic melting, and hurricane/tropical storm myths? 

The Deniers: The World Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud

http://www.amazon.com/The-Deniers-Scientists-Political-Persecution/dp/0980076315/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1337440215&sr=1-2

You can't tell a believer to think.

I am, however, growing tired of  "trolling" your stuff AJ and I do

apologize for the trolling aspects of my posts.

If you only study stuff that confirms what you already know

you will find to your satisfaction that you are always right.

I admire your ability to live in certainty because I cannot.

Google Dunning-Kruger effect.  I am sure you have an area of expertise

and climate study ain't it.  The problems of Nuclear power have been

politicized now to the point where it is very hard to find unbiased information and

it is outside my area of professional knowledge.  Once something has become

a political football the facts go out the window and factions and beliefs take their

places.  Reason and logic are gone and it might as well be religion.

Religious factions squabble while no man knows the nature of god. Many purport to do so.

They do it because they like it and get enjoyment from it. Religious or political material

probably shouldn't masquerade as science, rather as entertainment like a long theme-joke thread.

Look at the one on Radio over at Matrix.  That was actually science masquerading as fun.

Anyway it is saturday. Have fun.

cheers

Originally Posted By danlongman (19 MAY 2012 10:14am)

You can't tell a believer to think.

I am, however, growing tired of  "trolling" your stuff AJ and I do

apologize for the trolling aspects of my posts.

If you only study stuff that confirms what you already know

you will find to your satisfaction that you are always right.

I admire your ability to live in certainty because I cannot.

Google Dunning-Kruger effect.  I am sure you have an area of expertise

and climate study ain't it.  ...cheers

Well said!  Does it not cut both ways too?  Have you read that book?  If so how does it fail?  If not, can one really say that having read it they couldn't reach a different conclusion?

One very interesting thing concerning those few challenges to global warming I mentioned is that each reputable scientist expert in those particular areas agreed that there was a consensus that man-made global warming existed but that in their particular field of expertise, like Mann's short-comings in statistical expertise, or hurricane/tropical storm activity, or artic/antartic melting, there was no evidence supporting the global warming consensus.  You see they all yield to the consensus in fields outside their expertise and accepted that consensus; just not in the areas of which they know.  The fact is one doesn't need to be a climatologist to understand the argument is hardly settled and that there is no single person or panel who can claim the final say.  In science there are not proven theories but theories awaiting to be disproven.