Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Royal Society book prize | Main | Corrupt inquiries »
Friday
Nov112011

Watermelon season - Josh 127

James Delingpole writes about The Linear No Threshold Hypothesis 

It is a brilliant wheeze. By working out how many deaths are caused by a big amount of toxin you can work backwards and predict how many deaths a tiny amount would cause. Simples.

Of course this could work for anything - like Green policies. Just work out how many people will die because of fuel poverty this winter due to green policies, and work back to  how many deaths there are per Green Politician (Watermelon cf Delingpole).

So really it is always the season to harvest Watermelons...

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (15)

By extension, deaths go up as money spent on renewables goes up - green taxes kill people :)

Nov 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

Ah but the calculation of how many deaths one gets per green politician is validly subject to direct linear extrapolation. 25,000 premature deaths from fuel poverty each winter, assume only 50% are preventable by plentiful cheap nuclear or shale power divided by about 640 of the 650 MPs comes to 19-20 unnecesary killings each per year. That is a reasonable extrapolationn because no other factors get in the way. The difference with LNT is that the old rule "the dose makes the poison" applied precisely because we know many substances which kill at large doses are vital trace eleemts/vitamins at small doses. This "hormetic" effect is undeniable in many cases and likely in all.

In particular there is no experimental evidence whatsoever for LNT in radioactivity & never has been, whereas for around a century there has been proof of radiation hormesis in plants, mirobes and small laboratiory animals where such testing is ethical and possible..

Nov 11, 2011 at 1:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterNeil Craig

When DECC comes calling with its windmill plans in hand, big landowners call out "Get ooonnnn my land!!!"

Nov 11, 2011 at 1:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterRick Bradford

Neil Craig:
"In particular there is no experimental evidence whatsoever for LNT in radioactivity & never has been, whereas for around a century there has been proof of radiation hormesis in plants, mirobes and small laboratiory animals where such testing is ethical and possible.."

With regard to a direct but unforseen human experiment take a look at: http://jpands.org/vol9no1/chen.pdf

Nov 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM | Unregistered Commenteroxonmoron

The cost of nuclear power would be much reduced if it weren't for the application of the linear no threshold model. Radiation hormesis shows that low radiation doses are beneficial for health. There's masses of evidence out there, but the radiation dose limits will never be changed because of watermelons.

Nov 11, 2011 at 2:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Watermelon plot:- Y axis = moral high ground, X axis = indignation.

Nov 11, 2011 at 3:57 PM | Unregistered Commentersimpleseekeraftertruth

@Neil Craig

Fantastic - hormesis is a wonderful topic and would be worth investing serious research money into rather than the banal and endless ecodrivel that stifles humanity. Would be so good to show that 'chemical' exposure can not only be harmless but actually beneficial - e.g. cancer rates in agrochemical users are reported to be markedly below average, likewise in the nuclear power industry. Meanwhile evidence builds that environments with too few 'contaminants' seem to cause immune system dysfunction such as allergies.

Nov 11, 2011 at 5:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterSayNoToFearmongers

Today BBC 6o/c News To get a soundbite from the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the economic crisis, found him at an opening ceremony of a renewable energy facility. And the Scottish Daily Record announces this

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2011/11/11/george-osborne-announces-100m-renewable-energy-boost-in-scotland-86908-23554329/

Nov 11, 2011 at 6:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Queue Zed popping up & accusing us all of advocating & condoning murder!

Nov 11, 2011 at 8:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterAdam Gallon

I'm sure most people on here are familiar with it already but I just read Christopher Snowdon's devastating critique of Left bible du jour The Spirit Level. The parallels between [Wilkinson & Pickett's] tactics (talk of an 'overwhelming consensus', opponents as 'deniers' or paid lackeys of industry etc etc)and those of warmists are quite striking. I have become more and more aware of these recurring alarmist themes in recent years (see Dr. Goldacre? Two can play that game...), but this example really stood out for me.

Nov 11, 2011 at 8:36 PM | Unregistered CommenterDougieJ

Neil Craig: You wrote -

"With regard to a direct but unforseen human experiment take a look at: http://jpands.org/vol9no1/chen.pdf"

A most interesting paper. Thank you for providing a link to it.

Nov 11, 2011 at 10:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterNic Lewis

Uhm, maybe I'm mis-reading the graph? It appears that the curve is nonlinear, asymptotic to the Y axis? As the number of Greens increases, the number of deaths levels off and eventually stops? Is this what Josh is really trying to say, or is he just trying to hide the incline?

Nov 12, 2011 at 12:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterRedbone

Thanks for that Oxon. The Taiwan incident fits almost all of the requirements of a laboratory experiment, though accidental, and strongly supports radiation hormesis.

I have done this blog item collating links to as many separate pieces of evidence for hormesis as I can find. http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2010/03/low-level-radiation-evidence-that-it-is.html

I also, for balance, offered to put up links for scientific evidence pointing towards the LNT hypothesis but none have ever been produced.

If anybody has any evidence, either way, which isn't already listed I would be pleased to add it if you let me know.

I consider it likely, extrapolating from the curve of nuclear growth in the 60s and 70s, that we should now be producing about 240% of the electricity, worldwide, that we are. Since LNT is a necessary foundation for the anti-nuclear movement this fraud has been far more damaging to humanity than even the "catastrophic warming" one and at least financially, far more than the DDT one as well.

Nov 12, 2011 at 12:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterNeil Craig

Redbone, I blame the terrible raw data I had to work with. But with your excellent corrections I am sure it can and will be improved.

;-)

Nov 12, 2011 at 2:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosh

Redbone

Uhm, maybe I'm mis-reading the graph? It appears that the curve is nonlinear, asymptotic to the Y axis? As the number of Greens increases, the number of deaths levels off and eventually stops? Is this what Josh is really trying to say, or is he just trying to hide the incline?

Just about any biological and indeed most processes of any type I am aware of are not truly linear but ogival -- that is the integral of the bell curve statisticians know and love.

Josh is merely showing the lowest portion of that curve. It will eventually flatten out into a linear-like mid-section and then decrease in slope to near zero as the last few remaining watermelons are slaughtered, leading to their extinction

Nov 12, 2011 at 3:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>