8 Comments

  1. This show goes in the Golden Eps archive! Talk about brain trust!! Keep this cadre coming on!!!
    (Lots of disruptive sabotage via anti-nukes throughout this top ace show!! 😀 )


    Re: “Note: During the show, Cal reminded me that this show would probably be posted on December 2, which is an important day in nuclear energy history.”

    Why not declare this date the truer “birth” of nuclear energy than the media’s favorite guilt-and-horror ridden explosions in a desert years later? Public and schools know squat about Stagg Field! Not even any movies made of it! How ’bout it ANS & NEI & Co.?

    “Spot On!” Jeremiah should be sic’ed on poisonous blogs like “Nuclear (cough) News” sliming truth and willfully deceiving people by passing off FUD as real news! Really!! Tear ’em to shreds, Jerr!!!

    Bring this same Dec 2 group back (along with “the girls”) just for a prime discussion in media’s role and responsibility in fair and accurate nuclear public perception and does nuclear have any fair friends in the media, and the biggie, how can nuclear education fight a green-biased media and expose their fossil sponsors? The Canada guys would be great in this too!!

    Invite a pro-nuclear politician on the RoundTable for some grilling on the bad state of nuke affairs! Or just to see their writ excuses not to come.

    I’m already doing this (and being brushed aside as a lone Joe), but spread open-letter invitations out to anti-nuclear blogs and anti-nuclear honchos to come meet this Dec 2 group in a RoundTable debate and post why they REFUSE!!

    This fine ensemble must not be keep in the blog closet!! ANS & NEI should recruit and sponsor this bunch on a national nuke education tour if not featured on an essential post-Pandora pro-nuke media production! At the very least shadow-box the antis!! Let not FUD or anti-nuke propaganda go unchallenged anywhere or else the unwashed thinks it’s legit!

    Good Show! Encore — LOTS!!!

    James Greenidge
    Queens NY

  2. James,

    From your review, I’m not sure if I should make it a point to listen to this podcast.

Comments are closed.

Similar Posts

  • Professor Gerry Thomas explains radiation health risks

    A friend whose Twitter handle is @ActinideAge just posted a link to Gerry Thomas Highlights Misconceptions over Health Impacts of Nuclear Accidents. (Embedded below.) Even though it was published in November 2014 on the UN University YouTube channel, it had received a grand total of 189 views at the time I visited on April 6,…

  • Atomic Show #265 – Atomic Optimism. Under-appreciated opportunities in sight.

    On Sunday, Feb 17, I realized that I was feeling extraordinarily good about the future of atomic energy, the future of clean energy production, and the future prosperity of the world that my grandchildren are going to inhabit. I immediately composed and sent an invitation to some atomic colleagues to join me in a conversation….

  • DOE execs killed respected science program studying radiation health effects. Fired PM who tried to protect science

    Senior Department of Energy executives, several of whom were “Acting” Obama Administration appointees in roles that normally require Senate advice and consent, made decisions that eliminated unique research into the biological effects of low dose radiation in the United States. Early research results from the program are arguably sufficient to support decisions with globally important…

  • Radiation health effects for medical doctors

    Misinformation about radiation health effects does not just affect the nuclear industry and dramatically increase the costs associated with all nuclear energy technologies. It is also having a deleterious effect on the beneficial use of radiation and radioactive materials in medical diagnosis and treatment. Throughout their training programs, medical doctors have been taught to do…

  • Kenneth Pitzer blamed AEC advisors for slow power reactor development

    During the Atomic Energy Commission’s (AEC) earliest years, the General Advisory Committee was sometimes viewed as a source of discouraging, delaying advice. Made up of selected members of the scientific establishment, the group habitually sought more studies and inserted costly delays aimed at making the perfect next step instead of taking steps that were good…