Exactly, demonstrating how tempting it is to edit things a wee bit, to produce another scary story.
You just had to go and spoil it didn't you?Nice try.
2007 was the year of the pig.
2008 was the year of the rat.
2009 was the year of the ox.
2010 is the year of the Tiger and begins February 14, 2010.
I still got a nice chuckle though.
Good speech, thanks. That part about twenty years from now, you look back and think of all the potential reminds me of this quote by Mark Twain:That made me think of a line in thehttp://www.planetgary.com/sunscreen.htm" [Broken]:
Possibly. Irrational fear continues to prevent the completion of the Yucca Mountain project. As for our fear, it served a good survival purpose, but is largely out of step in modern society. However, the media uses to get and keep your attention, thereby earning advertising income.That scare genome may have prompted cave men to be cautious not to be eaten but could it bounce today? How would mankind fare if it was able to have rationality prevail for solving daily issues like energy surety. For instance, is the nuclear scare (Tchernobyl, profileration) preventing potential rational solutions?
Right, hence it's very rare that things are evaluated as they are, for instance on Chernobyl. Compare http://www.ccp-intl.org/documents/chernobylfacts2.pdf [Broken].Possibly. Irrational fear continues to prevent the completion of the Yucca Mountain project. As for our fear, it served a good survival purpose, but is largely out of step in modern society. However, the media uses to get and keep your attention, thereby earning advertising income.
From the second:Large families in rural areas – people who farm and collect their food – continue to
receive large doses of radiation from the food supply. Tragically, these people will need
to change their traditional ways forever in order to preserve their own health.
The proper null hypothesis should be that the effects of the Chernobyl environment on an organism do not differ from effects outside the environment. Falsification of the null hypothesis has profound implications for society. If there is an elevated mutation rate and loss of health, then appropriate measures should be taken to protect ourselves. No one would argue with that. But we must be mindful that the costs of over-regulation can be extreme. Zbigniew Jaworowski, former chairman of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, has estimated that enforcing the radiation-safety regulations in the U.S. costs about three billion dollars for each life saved from accidental exposure. By comparison, the measles vaccine costs $99 per life saved.
Maybe a song of Dutch artist/singer Herman Van Veen -right after the fall of the Berlin wall- says it all, instead of being relieved about the end of the cold war he sings: the bomb will never be droppedIt seems to me that all this end of the world business just reflects our collective fear that despite all of our advancements, our civilization is just nothing more than ants building an anthill. We're just waiting for a good rain, an anteater, or some kid on a bicycle to come by and wipe out all progress. Perhaps such a thing is inevitable. Ants continue to build even though their hard work may be wiped out at any moment...seems like there is a lesson in that.