Crosspost: Paul Gunter, Beyond Nuclear on Plutonium particles and other topics

[flamingdem]

2:30 Gunter says that active Plutonium particles from No.3 are being spread
in smoke and possibly caused the "neutron beams"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x566374

Run time: 06:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qnU-UoZC40

Posted on YouTube: March 24, 2011
By YouTube Member: TheBigPictureRT
Views on YouTube: 27

Posted on DU: March 24, 2011
By DU Member: thomhartmann
Views on DU: 336

[wtmusic]

1. The Paul Gunter who has no training in nuclear engineering?

I can't find any evidence he graduated from 8th grade, much less received any formal training in science:

"Paul Gunter is a co-founder of the Clamshell Alliance anti-nuclear group, who was arrested at Seabrook Station Nuclear Power Plant for non-violent civil disobedience on several occasions.<1> An energy policy analyst and activist, he has been a vocal critic of nuclear power for more than 30 years. Gunter worked as the Director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for Nuclear Information and Resource Service for almost 20 years.<2> In 2007, Gunter joined Beyond Nuclear as their nuclear reactor specialist. He has made many national and international television, radio, and conference appearances and is often quoted in the press."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gunter

Why would you want to quote someone so obviously biased and uninformed? :shrug:

[flamingdem]

2. You'd probably rather believe the NRC or Tepco! Water's fine to drink!

We don't need any extra safety mechanisms for Indian Point!

[wtmusic]

3. I believe that one disreputable source doesn't counteract another.

Don't you?

[flamingdem]

4. The organization is well respected nt

[wtmusic]

5. By whom? nt

[flamingdem]

6. Everyone but the pro nuclear lobby nt

[flamingdem]

7. and Anne Coulter, she hate them big time nt

[wtmusic]

8. A real Sarah Palin answer.

(Of course I'm referring to the time when she was asked by Katie Couric what newspapers she reads, and she replied, "All of them". A real bullshit answer, as was yours.)

By now you should be noticing what Robert Alvarez, Paul Gunter, Arnie Gundersen, and many other talkshow "experts" have in common - no titles or letters after their names, little or no formal training in science, and no accountability to anyone under peer review. Paid to entertain, they represent an inbred circle of pseudo-intellectuals who feed upon each other's pre-conceived notions.

The antithesis of science.

Not sure why anyone would want to watch them, much less quote them. You might as well quote the winner of "America's Got Talent".

[flamingdem]

11. Figures you don't recognize irony nt

[wtmusic]

12. "It's ironic that Gunter feels qualified to go anywhere near this topic."

Is that what you meant? :D

[flamingdem]

14. I FOUND YOUR EXPERT! You will LOVE this guy!!!!

http://thesciencecouncil.com/index.php/william-hannum

22 March 2011

LOOK AT THESE CREDENTIALS !!!

Dr. Hannum retired after more than 40 years in nuclear power development, stretching from design and analysis of the Shippingport reactor to the Integral Fast Reactor. He earned his BA in physics at Princeton and his MS and PhD in nuclear physics at Yale. He has held key management positions with the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE), in reactor physics , reactor safety, and as Deputy Manager of the Idaho Operations Office. He served as Deputy Director General of the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Paris, France; Chairman of the TVA Nuclear Safety Review Boards, and Director of the West Valley (high level nuclear waste processing and D&D) Demonstration Project. Dr. Hannum is a fellow of the American Nuclear Society, and has served as a consultant to the National Academy of Engineering on nuclear proliferation issues.

On 11 March 2011, a massive earthquake hit Japan. The six reactors at Fukushima-Dai-ichi suffered ground accelerations somewhat in excess of design specification. It appears that all of the critical plant equipment survived the earthquake without serious damage, and safety systems performed as designed. The following tsunami, however, carried the fuel tanks for the emergency diesels out to sea, and compromised the battery backup systems. All off-site power was lost, and power sufficient operate the pumps that provide cooling of the reactors and the used-fuel pools remained unavailable for over a week. Heroic efforts by the TEPCo operators limited the radiological release. A massive recovery operation will begin as soon as they succeed in restoring the shutdown cooling systems.

It is important to put the consequences of this event in context. This was not a disaster (the earthquake and tsunami were disasters). This was not an accident; the plant experienced a natural event (“Act of God” in insurance parlance) far beyond what it was designed for. Based on the evidence available today, it can be stated with confidence that no one will have suffered any identifiable radiation-related heath effects from this event. A few of the operators may have received a high enough dose of radiation to have a slight statistical increase in their long term risk of developing cancer, but I would place the number at no more than 10 to 50. None of the reports suggest that any person will have received a dose approaching one Seivert, which would imply immediate health effects.

[wtmusic]

15. You seem to couch analysis in a very personal manner.

That's also antithetical to science. I don't "love" William Hannum any more than I "hate" Paul Gunter (or vice versa).

Technically there's only one thing you can fault William Hannum's analysis on at this point - I doubt he would continue to assert "it can be stated with confidence that no one will have suffered any identifiable radiation-related heath effects from this event." Other than that his analysis is spot on, 14 days later.

You've been listening to the Paul Gunters for so long that you probably have it in your brain Fukushima is far more serious than the tsunami which just killed 20,000 people. Fear is very easy to get caught up in, but it's a warped view of reality.

[TheWraith]

9. You mean, believe actual scientists over a non-scientist on a matter of science?

Perish the thought! After all, nuclear power--like, say, creationism versus evolution--is a situation where all opinions are equally valid, and not limited by those pesky "facts" or "knowledge." :eyes:

[flamingdem]

10. The Japanese NRC admitted that there were fission products in the No. 3 pond

.. it will come out about the plutonium and other than that what was the trouble with what Paul Gunther said? I think anyone who depends on credentials when gathering knowledge will get a limited view of the facts. The "experts" are just as likely to have an agenda, they are so often paid off these days.

[wtmusic]

13. Agree, I think we should get the blithering idiot point of view too

Fair and balanced.

[TheWraith]

16. Right, we shouldn't "depend on credentials when gathering knowledge".

Those damned elitist scientists, telling us what to think based on their fancy "ed-you-cay-shun!" :eyes: