Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
Despite what Neil thinks I actually look at his links. The last 3 minutes on the design of Chinese cities was pretty interesting, the rest not so much.
|
Missed the point. It's not the (presumed) content of the links I object to, it's their format. Real information is presented as text: video is almost always propaganda intended to brainwash the illiterate masses. Lot of reasons for this, which I won't really get into (unless you need a good off-topic flame), but a big one is that the streaming nature of video (or speech) short-circuits critical thinking. The viewer takes in a point, but has no time to think about it, because the video has streamed past.
Quote:
|
I am by no means anti-environment either, but my educational background in engineering makes me a pragmatist.
|
Nor am I. Indeed, in a lot of ways I am a radical tree-hugger - one of the reasons I don't e.g. want to see my Nevada desert ecosystems covered with solar panels. But I am by inclination & training both a scientist and a skeptic, so I'm not willing to blindly accept any dogma. Everything I see points to the anti-nuclear "environmentalist" arguments being driven far more by leftist politics than by actual evidence.
Unless you're willing to kill off a large fraction of the human race - which I'm not, no matter how much I sometimes wish they'd leave voluntarily :-) - you need power to run an industrial society, and the way to do that with the least environmental impact is to have a large part (by not all, by any means) generated from nuclear power.