"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> (Interestingly, you can find lots of studies and articles about the surprising
> proliferation of wildlife in the Chernobyl area.  The pro-nuclear camp cites
> these and says, "See, nuclear radiation isn't so bad after all."  But a closer
> look reveals that the animals are often in poor health, and the implication
> hits you like a fuel rod to the side of the head:  an exploding nuclear pile is
> less dangerous to wildlife than the mere presence of human beings!  Oh.

Huh, that's an interesting twist...

Then again, "mother nature" has had her own uncontrolled nuclear experiments
long before Chernobyl, for example with that water-moderated natural fission
reactor somewhere in Africa...

Post a reply to this message

"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

> In my country, misconceptions about evolution are the norm.  The problem is
> fundamentalist Christian organizations who do not understand the difference
> between real evidence and a 3000 book, and who believe that science is a form
> of religion.  While they have been spectacularly unsuccessful at forcing their
> mythology into our public school biology classes, they have succeeded in
> emasculating biology curricula though politics, intimidation, and sophistry.
> Most people don't understand what makes science different from religion, and
> are thus unequipped to defend science against the sophists.

I've been reading Stephen Jay Gould's book, "Bully for Brontosaurus", and he
really lays into this psuedo-scientific clap-trap. Interestingly, he was a
witness in an important science-vs-creationism trial (way back in the 1980's I
think), a case that ultimately led to creationism being removed 'once and for
all' from classrooms. (Based on a 'separation of church and state' issue.) Of
course, that doesn't stop fundamentalist-minded local and regional school
boards from forever trying to reinstate it. Like the infamous incident in
Dover, Maryland.

> (It doesn't help
> that Texas, of all states, has de facto control over textbook content for the
> whole USA.

Is that true?? I don't even have words to express my shock. That's *really*
disturbing. I can't even imagine how that came to be--oh, except through
politics. And a certain ex-President. Duh.

Ken W.

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Then again, "mother nature" has had her own uncontrolled nuclear experiments
> long before Chernobyl, for example with that water-moderated natural fission
> reactor somewhere in Africa...

That reaction seemed well-controlled to me.  No moving parts, no meltdown, no
explosion, and non-hazardous on-site storage of spent fuel.  It's been
suggested that we can learn from that incident.

For what it's worth, the reaction ceased about a billion years before
multicellular organisms evolved.  At the time, the upstart cyanobacteria were
still struggling to poison all life on earth with their chemical waste, oxygen.
 Hmmm... nuclear hotbeds, 0; species that decimate everything in their wake, 2.

Post a reply to this message

Has someone mentioned this one:

Phase IV: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_IV

Post a reply to this message

"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> For what it's worth, the reaction ceased about a billion years before
> multicellular organisms evolved.  At the time, the upstart cyanobacteria were
> still struggling to poison all life on earth with their chemical waste, oxygen.
>  Hmmm... nuclear hotbeds, 0; species that decimate everything in their wake, 2.

The cyanobacteria obviously were unsuccessful: Other species adapted to "eating"
their waste.

Post a reply to this message

Zeke <zek### [at] zeke3dcom> wrote:
> Has someone mentioned this one:
>
> Phase IV: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_IV

Good morning! Read the older posts :)

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> [...] a case that ultimately led to creationism being removed 'once and for
> all' from classrooms. (Based on a 'separation of church and state' issue.)

Only from public school science classrooms.  It is fine to teach it in a
comparative religion class in an unbiased fashion, for example.  Of course,
this doesn't work in practice because the people trying to force their religion
into public schools will not tolerate an unbiased presentation.  Private schools
can teach what they want, although the kids still have to pass state
standards--leading Kansas to gut theirs.

> Of
> course, that doesn't stop fundamentalist-minded local and regional school
> boards from forever trying to reinstate it. Like the infamous incident in
> Dover, Maryland.

Dover, Pennsylvania, actually.

> "Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> > (It doesn't help
> > that Texas, of all states, has de facto control over textbook content for the
> > whole USA.
>
> Is that true?? I don't even have words to express my shock. That's *really*
> disturbing. I can't even imagine how that came to be--oh, except through
> politics. And a certain ex-President. Duh.

Market veto power.  Texas has the 2nd highest number of school children, and if
Texas won't buy a textbook, the publishers won't print it.  (California has
more school children, but not as strong a religious agenda--although there is
_some_ level of religious agenda, as the voters recently voted to dictate to
other people whom they're allowed to marry.)

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:

> > "Phase IV" was an odd film--essentially a documentary about ants, turned into
> > a quasi-doomsday story. Clever conceit, though.
>
> Loosely based on a short story by H.G.Wells as I heard tell, so I'm not too
> surprised about the documentary info regarding ants. After all, he was into
> science-fiction, not science-fantasy.
>

Oops. I may have confused PHASE IV with THE HELLSTROM CHRONICLES--I think
*that's* the one I was referring to. (It's the one I remember, anyway.) I must
have seen PHASE IV at some point as well, but the two films are kind of blended
together in my memory.

KW

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
\
> Nope, that's "The Blob." The seminal cheapie 50's monster flick.  I *still*
> can't figure out how they made that blobby creature--AMAZING for its time.
> (This was the first movie that REALLY scared me. Badly. Gave me nightmares for
> years! Oh well, I was just a wee little kid...)
> 
> 
> 


Ahhhh! You are right.

Post a reply to this message