From: John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com>
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 1, 2015 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: SciAm predicts strong future for renewable energy
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
<everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> Quoting directly from the 2005 WHO report on Chernobyl accident “5 SEPTEMBER
> 2005 | GENEVA - A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of
> radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
And yet that very same 2005 WHO report on the Chernobyl accident says:
>> "As of mid-2005, however, fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed
>> to radiation from the disaster"
And yet the same report states that it *expects that 4000 people will die* as a
result of cancers that were triggered by radionuclides that they came into
contact with, ingested and/or absorbed through bio-uptake channels into their
body tissue.
>>But it's now 2015 not 2005 and 10 years later there is STILL not the
>>slightest sign that the prediction of massive deaths from radiation is even
>>close to being correct. Zero, zilch nada, goose egg. In fact I can't think
>>of a single prediction about the harm caused by a large scale radiation
>>release that was made in the last 70 years that didn't turn out to be
>>ridiculously pessimistic.
Hundreds of thousands of people die of cancer every year in the areas that
experienced fallout from Chernobyl; of these millions and millions of cancer
deaths that have occurred in these regions over the many decades since the
accident you "know" that NONE of them were in any way related to or triggered
by radionuclides released into the environment as a result of that accident?
You "know" this how? >>And besides, Chernobyl happened 29 years ago so we
don't need half assed predictions about what the long term results will be, we
know.
Your cavalier denial that any of the cancers that have occurred in the affected
regions can possibly have anything to do with Chernobyl is baseless rhetoric.
The experts in the affected regions, who have access to the statistics, both
before and after the accident, speak of tens of thousands of cases of cancers
resulting in the death of the victims. Where is the statistical foundation to
support your denial? Are you an expert on cancer perchance? On how the disease
is triggered; how it progresses; what factors make it more or less severe?Or
are you just producing rhetorical streams of verbiage?
Chris
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
