On 27. 3. 2011. at 5:58, Indy said:

(Tekst inace nije ni priblizno los kao naslov... receno mi je da autori tekstova u Politici nemaju zadnju rec u pogledu davanja naslova svojim tekstovima, tako da iz "usuda" skoro sigurno stoji redakcija).

mali offtopic, ali se novinarima redovno prebacuju losi naslovi iako u dnevnoj stampi veoma retko novinar daje naslov. jedan od razloga za to je prozaican, tek u prelomu je moguce videti da li naslov pasuje ili ne, sve i da je najbolji moguci.

al zbilja naslov, pa i slicica sa naslovne, bas nikakve veze nisu imali sa tekstom.

evo jedne debate na praktično istu temu o kojoj mi ovde raspravljamo:"Prescription for Survival": A Debate on the Future of Nuclear Energy Between Anti-Coal Advocate George Monbiot and Anti-Nuclear Activist Dr. Helen Caldicott

  On 27. 3. 2011. at 14:03, Yoyogi said:

Hill Bile, tvoje verovanje u nauku je za svaku pohvalu. Kada obican covek pogleda okolo, vid da su to, u zadnjih 50 godina mahom rafinacije poznatih stvari.U nekom clanku sam procitao da je "low hanging fruit" vec pobrano bas negde oko pola veka unazad i od onda samo perfekcije.Nekome iz 1900-te godine da pokazes kuhinju iz 1973. sa mikrotalasnom pecnicom, masinom za sudove, tosterom...mislio bi da je u svemirskom brodu ako je znao sta je to.Danas da nekome iz 1973. pokazes danasnju kuhinju - mislio bi "to sam ja vec imao pre 40 godina".Cak i "game changing" mobilni telefoni su, tehnicki, bili moguci pre 50 godina, istina 50kg teski.Danas, da te ja pozovem na mobilni iz Japana, signal bi putovao 10 hiljada km ali ne moze da putuje od tvog mobilnog do tvog uveta bezzhicno (zaboravi Blue Tooth, rubbish).Kola su postala bolja i stedljivija a ona elektricna se oslanjaju na baterije koje se nisu sustinski promenile 200 godina od njihovog pronalaska.Americka energetska industrija ulaze u nauku i razvoj manje nego americki proizvodjaci hrane za kucne ljubimce (pet food).Ili najbolje kotirana firma na svetu, Apple, nije izmislila walkman, nije izmislila mobilni ali je rafiniranjem postojeceg napravila bogatstvo (druga po kapitalizaciji posle Exon Oil).Sam Bill Gates je izjavio 2000. "Internet, ne nuklearna energija, je najznacajniji izum 20 veka". Pa smo uz taj izum imali maltene slom planete 2008-me a sam Microsoft eroziju svoje dominacije koju i danas gleda.

Postoje ljudi koji misle da su glavne stvari vec izmisljene, i da nema velikih proboja u nauci i tehnologiji u zadnje vreme.Ipak, neki bas i ne misle tako...

  On 1. 4. 2011. at 8:23, Diabolic said:

Postoje ljudi koji misle da su glavne stvari vec izmisljene, i da nema velikih proboja u nauci i tehnologiji u zadnje vreme.

Mislim da su uvek postojali ljudi koji su tako mislili. Zato i postoji prica o paradigmama.

  Quote

Kuhn challenged the then prevailing view of progress in "normal science." Scientific progress had been seen primarily as a continuous increase in a set of accepted facts and theories. In this work Kuhn argued for an episodic model in which, periods of such conceptual continuity in normal science were interrupted by periods of revolutionary science.

Mnogi pokusavaju da predvide u cemu ce se sastojati sledeci 'paradigm shift' u nauci, ali mozda sama priroda tih skokova znaci da ih nije moguce predvideti (tacno).

  Quote

During revolutions in science the discovery of anomalies leads to a whole new paradigm that changes the rules of the game...

Nisu ni Nemci racionalni, kao što sam mislioNemci gase nuklearke i uvoze strujuMogu da se "prave pametni" dok se i Francuzi i Česi ne "sete" da isključe svoje.

  Quote

Ja padoh na zemlju i začuh jedan glas govoriti mi: Saule, Saule, zašto me progoniš?Ja odgovorih: Tko si ti, Gospodine?Glas preuze: Ja sam Isus Nazarenac, ja sam taj koga ti progoniš.Moji pratitelji vidješe svjetlost ali ne čuše glas koji meni govoraše.Ja upitah: Što trebam učiniti, Gospodine? A Gospodin mi odgovori: ` Podigni se, idi u Damask, a ondje će te pokazati u pojedinost zadaću koja ti je naznačena.Ali, kako mi ta svjetlost bijaše oduzela vid, moji me kompanjoni moraše voditi za ruku da bih stigao u Damask.Bijaše ondje jedan stanoviti Ananias; bijaše to pobožan čovjek, vjeran Zakonu, čiji ugled bijaše dobar kod svih Židova koji ondje stanovahu.On me dođe naći i reče mi tada: Saule, brate moj, progledaj ponovo! I, u istom času, ja ponovo nađoh vid.On mi reče: Bog naših otaca ti je namijenio upoznati njegovu volju, to jest Pravednog i njegov vlastiti glas.Ti moraš naime, biti svjedokom za njega, pred svim ljudima, o onome što budeš vidio i čuo.Zašto dakle dvojiti? Hajdemo! Primi krštenje i očišćenje od svojih grijeha zazivajući njegovo *ime.

  Quote

The unpalatable truth is that the anti-nuclear lobby has misled us allI've discovered that when the facts don't suit them, the movement resorts to the follies of cover-up they usually denounce

Reveal hidden contents

Reveal hidden contents

George MonbiotThe Guardian, Tuesday 5 April 2011Over the last fortnight I've made a deeply troubling discovery. The anti-nuclear movement to which I once belonged has misled the world about the impacts of radiation on human health. The claims we have made are ungrounded in science, unsupportable when challenged, and wildly wrong. We have done other people, and ourselves, a terrible disservice.I began to see the extent of the problem after a debate last week with Helen Caldicott. Dr Caldicott is the world's foremost anti-nuclear campaigner. She has received 21 honorary degrees and scores of awards, and was nominated for a Nobel peace prize. Like other greens, I was in awe of her. In the debate she made some striking statements about the dangers of radiation. So I did what anyone faced with questionable scientific claims should do: I asked for the sources. Caldicott's response has profoundly shaken me.First she sent me nine documents: newspaper articles, press releases and an advertisement. None were scientific publications; none contained sources for the claims she had made. But one of the press releases referred to a report by the US National Academy of Sciences, which she urged me to read. I have now done so – all 423 pages. It supports none of the statements I questioned; in fact it strongly contradicts her claims about the health effects of radiation.I pressed her further and she gave me a series of answers that made my heart sink – in most cases they referred to publications which had little or no scientific standing, which did not support her claims or which contradicted them. (I have posted our correspondence, and my sources, on my website.) I have just read her book Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer. The scarcity of references to scientific papers and the abundance of unsourced claims it contains amaze me.For the last 25 years anti-nuclear campaigners have been racking up the figures for deaths and diseases caused by the Chernobyl disaster, and parading deformed babies like a medieval circus. They now claim 985,000 people have been killed by Chernobyl, and that it will continue to slaughter people for generations to come. These claims are false.The UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (Unscear) is the equivalent of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Like the IPCC, it calls on the world's leading scientists to assess thousands of papers and produce an overview. Here is what it says about the impacts of Chernobyl.Of the workers who tried to contain the emergency at Chernobyl, 134 suffered acute radiation syndrome; 28 died soon afterwards. Nineteen others died later, but generally not from diseases associated with radiation. The remaining 87 have suffered other complications, including four cases of solid cancer and two of leukaemia.In the rest of the population there have been 6,848 cases of thyroid cancer among young children – arising "almost entirely" from the Soviet Union's failure to prevent people from drinking milk contaminated with iodine 131. Otherwise "there has been no persuasive evidence of any other health effect in the general population that can be attributed to radiation exposure". People living in the countries affected today "need not live in fear of serious health consequences from the Chernobyl accident".Caldicott told me that Unscear's work on Chernobyl is "a total cover-up". Though I have pressed her to explain, she has yet to produce a shred of evidence for this contention.In a column last week, the Guardian's environment editor, John Vidal, angrily denounced my position on nuclear power. On a visit to Ukraine in 2006, he saw "deformed and genetically mutated babies in the wards … adolescents with stunted growth and dwarf torsos; foetuses without thighs or fingers". What he did not see was evidence that these were linked to the Chernobyl disaster.Professor Gerry Thomas, who worked on the health effects of Chernobyl for Unscear, tells me there is "absolutely no evidence" for an increase in birth defects. The National Academy paper Dr Caldicott urged me to read came to similar conclusions. It found that radiation-induced mutation in sperm and eggs is such a small risk "that it has not been detected in humans, even in thoroughly studied irradiated populations such as those of Hiroshima and Nagasaki".Like Vidal and many others, Caldicott pointed me to a book which claims that 985,000 people have died as a result of the disaster. Translated from Russian and published by the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, this is the only document that looks scientific and appears to support the wild claims made by greens about Chernobyl.A devastating review in the journal Radiation Protection Dosimetry points out that the book achieves this figure by the remarkable method of assuming that all increased deaths from a wide range of diseases – including many which have no known association with radiation – were caused by the Chernobyl accident. There is no basis for this assumption, not least because screening in many countries improved dramatically after the disaster and, since 1986, there have been massive changes in the former eastern bloc. The study makes no attempt to correlate exposure to radiation with the incidence of disease.Its publication seems to have arisen from a confusion about whether Annals was a book publisher or a scientific journal. The academy has given me this statement: "In no sense did Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences or the New York Academy of Sciences commission this work; nor by its publication do we intend to independently validate the claims made in the translation or in the original publications cited in the work. The translated volume has not been peer reviewed by the New York Academy of Sciences, or by anyone else."Failing to provide sources, refuting data with anecdote, cherry-picking studies, scorning the scientific consensus, invoking a cover-up to explain it: all this is horribly familiar. These are the habits of climate-change deniers, against which the green movement has struggled valiantly, calling science to its aid. It is distressing to discover that when the facts don't suit them, members of this movement resort to the follies they have denounced.We have a duty to base our judgments on the best available information. This is not only because we owe it to other people to represent the issues fairly, but also because we owe it to ourselves not to squander our lives on fairytales. A great wrong has been done by this movement. We must put it right.

  On 5. 4. 2011. at 9:14, dekss said:

Mogu da se "prave pametni" dok se i Francuzi i Česi ne "sete" da isključe svoje.

Lepota tog resenja sastoji se i u tome da struja uvezena iz Ist. Evrope ostavlja "ugljenicnu stopu" u zemlji proizvodnje, a Nemacka moze da se okiti time da je smanjila svoje stetne emisije. (To se sada popularno zove "carbon leak").

Kada su Indijci (Tata) kupili auto firmu "Jaguar" koja ima velika kola sa velikom emisijom, bilo je pitanje racionalsnosti kada dodje do poreza na CO2 emisiju.Resenje je - Tata pravi mali Nano, u ukupnoj proizvodnji njihovih kola CO2 emisija koju emituju ce biti uprosecena na dole, u proizvodnji velikih i malih vozila.

ovo spada pod alternative (mislim iz naslova):Why the £250bn wind power industry could be the greatest scam of our age - and here are the three 'lies' that prove it

Rivajval na srpski način

 

prof Šćepan Miljanić i neki eko lik

 

Bajatović i predstavnica regulatornog tela

https://www.b92.net/biz/vesti/srbija.php?yyyy=2021&mm=10&dd=31&nav_id=2048621

 

pomoćnik direktora Instituta za nuklearne nauke Vinča, Dimović

 

A ima i ovo...

https://www.euronews.rs/biznis/privreda/21473/da-li-su-nuklearne-elektrane-resenje-za-energetsku-bezbednost-srbije/vest

 

Eppur si muove...

Ovo bi ipak mogla da bude Vest:

Finally, a Fusion Reaction Has Generated More Energy Than Absorbed by The Fuel

  Quote

The goal is to achieve ignition – a point at which the energy generated by the fusion process exceeds the total energy input.

The experiment, conducted on 8 August, fell just short of that mark

Možda za 20-30 godina

  On 4. 12. 2021. at 23:23, laser lotus said:

Možda za 20-30 godina

'Ajde?

Pa jos onako mangupski 

Jebote, okacio sam vest, bez komentara, ponajmanje glede vremena, cisto da vidim(o) da stvari mrdaju...

I da je u svakom slucaju blize, ma i za korak...

Nista vise i nista manje...

 

E, bas ti hvala... 

Ne vidim u čemu je problem. Par minuta ranije sam na drugom mjestu čitao komentare na istu vijest i tu su skrenuli pažnju na naslov koji sugeriše jedno, a stvar je ipak malo drugačija.

 

Svakako da ono što kaže direktorka LLNL ima malo veću težinu od mene čije je poznavanje fuzije na nivou Politikinog zabavnika, ali ovo vijest djeluje da je u rangu sličnih vijesti o liječenju raka kod miševa - cilj je još vrlo, vrlo daleko.