Originally Posted by
Pourya S
I'm not going to lie and say I watched the whole video.. bailed 2-3 min in after skipping around a bit.. but I just want to say that some of yall should be more skeptical of the things you hear or read.. don't just blindly assume its correct(the scientific method is a good practice for daily life). Without going through a wall of text I think that should suffice.
Basically at a minimum I'd need way more then this to even think this woman was correct.. as she is going completely against the consensus.
edit:
Considered an authority by who? What is the subject?!? Doomsdayology?!? does glenn beck supply the degrees?(joking aside I am curious). Also she has a lot to gain potentially ... she gains exposure/attention.. she may get funding for her research if she actually does some?!? And of course she sells her book if she has any. Massive scrutiny doesn't prevent the flow of cash money when appealing to a certain group of people.
What other dangers?!? evil scientist assassins? :P
This does make me more curious to watch the video fully but it will have to wait until tonight also do you have any links to the "data" you're referencing?
also this is not intended as an attack... just chit chat.
Edit 2: Just went to her website and that was pretty much an instant /facepalm... she has like 8 different books.. Definitely has a financial interest based on the bio on her own website lol.. also shes a "physician".. so a doctor.. and a practicing doctor as well 40ish years ago.. but man last time I checked that did not make a person an authority on anything in regards to nuclear energy etc.. other then if you gave me this much radiation it will effect the body is this manner. Her source of income as it appears today comes from her books and from public speaking.
Basically I'm incredibly skeptical.. that came from 5 minutes of searching so it could obviously be flawed.. maybe but thought I'd add it.
"I just want to say that some of yall should be more skeptical of the things you hear or read.. don't just blindly assume its correct(the scientific method is a good practice for daily life)."
You can be skeptical. That is often a worthy attribute, but I can't give you any real credence here.
Why?
Because although you left some interesting and potentially good questions, I'm not going to debate the subject with you until you actually
take the time to watch the video. Especially since the video itself contains some of your answers.
The positive publicity she has garnished for her honesty is far outweighed by the scrutiny she has received by the international community.
I don't know how many people you think are buying books on depleted uranium munitions, nuclear weapons, and nuclear weapons proliferation, but I promise you that she ain't no Jonathan Safran Foer.
Take a second to weigh the alternative to your skepticism.
A
woman makes a stink about the international nuclear situation, based on what is currently happening in Japan...to get...as you suggested, "funding for her research" and to "sell her books," to maybe a few thousand scholars and scientists.
Or...
if she is correct, the entire international community would have to admit that the
billions of dollars they have spent in the search for nuclear power, and the creation of nuclear weapons was a HUGE mistake
and admit to the fact that they have no way to ever get rid of what the mess they have created.
Bookmarks