Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
48. You have to admit your standards of what constitute "science" are very subjective
Fri Feb 22, 2013, 01:18 PM
Feb 2013

The offering I just described is, according to you, an acceptable source of "science" while the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists fails to qualify.

I just think that it takes a staggering amount of hubris to behave that way.

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
From Wikipedia

The cover of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has featured the famous Doomsday Clock since it debuted in 1947, when it was set at seven minutes to midnight.

Website www.thebulletin.org
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is a nontechnical online magazine that covers global security and public policy issues, especially related to the dangers posed by nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. It has been published continuously since 1945, when it was founded by former Manhattan Project physicists after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists of Chicago. The Bulletin's primary aim is to inform the public about nuclear policy debates while advocating for the international control of nuclear weapons. It is currently published by SAGE Publications.

One of the driving forces behind the creation of the Bulletin was the amount of public interest surrounding atomic energy at the dawn of the atomic age. In 1945 the public interest in atomic warfare and weaponry inspired contributors to the Bulletin to attempt to inform those interested about the dangers and destruction that atomic war could bring about.[1] To convey the particular peril posed by nuclear weapons, the Bulletin devised the Doomsday Clock in 1947. The original setting was seven minutes to midnight. The minute hand of the Clock first moved closer to midnight in response to changing world events in 1949, following the first Soviet nuclear test. The Clock is now recognized as a universal symbol of the nuclear age.[citation needed] In the 1950s, the Bulletin was involved in the formation of Pugwash, an annual conference of scientists concerned about nuclear proliferation, and, more broadly, the role of science in modern society.

The original founder and editor of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was biophysicist Eugene Rabinowitch (1901–1973). He founded the magazine alongside physicist Hyman Goldsmith. Rabinowitch was a professor of botany and biophysics at the University of Illinois and was also a founding member of the Continuing Committee for the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs.[2] In addition to Rabinowitch and Goldsmith, contributors have included: Morton Grodzins, Hans Bethe, Anatoli Blagonravov, Max Born, Harrison Brown, Stuart Chase, Brock Chisholm, E.U. Condon, Albert Einstein, E.K. Fedorov, Bernard T. Feld, James Franck, Ralph E. Lapp, Richard S. Leghorn, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Lord Boyd Orr, Michael Polanyi, Louis Ridenour, Bertrand Russell, Nikolay Semyonov, Leó Szilárd, Edward Teller, A.V. Topchiev, Harold C. Urey, Paul Weiss, James L. Tuck, among many others.[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_of_the_Atomic_Scientists


http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bulletin-of-the-Atomic-Scientists/105988006100020

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Exit economics: The relatively low cost of Germany's nuclear phase-out kristopher Jan 2013 #1
And part of the economics is that German lignite is cheap muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #5
Implication vs reality kristopher Jan 2013 #6
German carbon emissions from electricity generation went up in 2011 muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #7
"greenhouse gas emissions should be of primary interest" kristopher Jan 2013 #9
Uh, no, the German electricity sector is becoming ever more dependent on coal Yo_Mama Feb 2013 #37
Your characterization of that information is untrue. kristopher Feb 2013 #40
My "characterization" comes directly from the sources Yo_Mama Feb 2013 #41
"the German electricity sector is becoming ever more dependent on coal" kristopher Feb 2013 #42
Sup Kris XemaSab Jan 2013 #2
du rec. nt xchrom Jan 2013 #3
Welcome back, n/t CRH Jan 2013 #4
Thank you. nt kristopher Feb 2013 #36
Coal is economical. joshcryer Jan 2013 #8
Unfortunately it is. kristopher Jan 2013 #10
A tax. joshcryer Feb 2013 #11
"Externalize the cost of coal"?? kristopher Feb 2013 #12
I should have said "address the external costs of coal." joshcryer Feb 2013 #13
Think about your "belief" kristopher Feb 2013 #14
You've been saying that for years. joshcryer Feb 2013 #15
Why would people burn coal when it will cost less to use renewables? kristopher Feb 2013 #17
Well, sure, they wouldn't, if it did. joshcryer Feb 2013 #22
Price trends are unequivocal. kristopher Feb 2013 #25
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #16
"all the energy that is economical to use" kristopher Feb 2013 #18
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #19
re: Harris kristopher Feb 2013 #20
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #21
Your second clause is specifically rejected by Harris kristopher Feb 2013 #23
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #27
I didn't think you were being critical kristopher Feb 2013 #28
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #30
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #24
"Increase efficiency when energy sources are limiting" kristopher Feb 2013 #26
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Feb 2013 #29
That's odd, GG. kristopher Feb 2013 #31
I realized I wasn't ready to start discussing this yet, for a variety of reasons. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #32
Well, we have to concede that anti-nuke ignorance, fear, and superstition HAVE NNadir Feb 2013 #33
"anti-nuke ignorance, fear, and superstition HAVE"... kristopher Feb 2013 #34
You can't admit that anti-nuke ignorance/fear/superstition EXIST FBaggins Feb 2013 #35
Even after Fukushima, twice as many French support nuclear power as are against wtmusic Feb 2013 #38
How many want to transition away from nuclear? kristopher Feb 2013 #39
I always thought the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was written by scientists wtmusic Feb 2013 #43
You ARE the person who was promoting the fictional... kristopher Feb 2013 #44
You have distinct memories of that, do you? wtmusic Feb 2013 #45
That's a very convenient memory lapse kristopher Feb 2013 #46
And a scathing critique it is. wtmusic Feb 2013 #47
You have to admit your standards of what constitute "science" are very subjective kristopher Feb 2013 #48
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Nuclear power and the Fre...»Reply #48