Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Jun 19, 2018 3:18 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Author Message
PostPosted: Feb 23, 2017 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 568
Location: Iowa, USA
darryl siemer wrote:
(Again I’m not afraid to address “issues” that are politically charged – it’s the deliberate avoidance of such issues that’s rendered modern “science” unable to address real problems)

While I can agree with your statement my primary concern is that some of the points you make seem out of place. The paper is about "killer apps" for nuclear power, therefore one would expect to see a list of applications for nuclear power that one might not normally consider. Bringing up a topic like population control in a paper on the potential applications for nuclear power is simply out of place, the potential for bruising a reader's political sensibilities is simply another reason to avoid the unnecessary commentary. The goal is to convince people that nuclear power is a good thing. If you have a side commentary on something unrelated to nuclear power in the paper then you risk creating an animosity towards nuclear power only because they dislike your views on an unrelated subject.

If you explained how population control is a "killer app" for nuclear power then I'd see no problem with including it in this paper, political correctness be damned. Since this connection between nuclear power and population control is left unexplained then it might be worthy of comment if it wasn't so politically charged. The side commentary on polymeric cements is a bit out of place as well but there is little risk of an emotional response from a reader over this, therefore the mention of this alternative may even be helpful.

Political correctness in scientific debates is a problem and I would also like to see that emotion does not drive scientific arguments. I also believe that everyone needs to choose carefully what battles they want to fight and when they do so.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Feb 23, 2017 8:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 21, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 308
Location: idaho falls
Kurt Sellner wrote:
darryl siemer wrote:
(Again I’m not afraid... t

If you explained how population control is a "killer app" for nuclear power then I'd see no problem with including it in this paper, political correctness be damned. Since this connection between nuclear power and population control is left unexplained then it might be worthy of comment ...i


??? Here's what my paper says about the tie in between a nuclear renaissance and "painless population control".

Fortunately, it has also been demonstrated – most effectively by Scandinavian counties - that the best way to simultaneously address overcrowding and climate change is to increase the quality of life (prosperity) of already-living individuals (Dao 2012) - something that only a properly implemented “second nuclear era” could render possible for ~9 billion people and more just a token fraction of the earth’s other advanced life forms.

If that's not a good enough explanation, how can I make it clearer? The real problem is that, collectively, humans are about as "sapient" as is beer yeast or rats - we reproduce madly until almost all of the "sugar" has been consumed, fight over the dregs, and then die off in droves. Unless we begin to behave differently, there'll probably be a third world war during this century that cuts human population by >80%.

_________________
Darryl Siemer


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Feb 23, 2017 11:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 568
Location: Iowa, USA
darryl siemer wrote:
If that's not a good enough explanation, how can I make it clearer?

I believe where you are going is that with increasing education and prosperity there is a tendency for reduced birth rates, is that correct? I ask because you did not state that explicitly. This is generally accepted as true but it is not always true. I recall reading somewhere that the low birth rates in Scandinavia is due to cultural pressures rather than economic prosperity. I don't have my source handy so I can't fault you if you don't believe me. The point is that I had to read that several times before I saw the connection and even then I'm not sure if I'm right.

I'd like to go on but it's late and I have a midterm exam tomorrow. I hope I was helpful.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group