Archive for May, 2011

May 25, 2011

Nuclear Radiation - a talk by Prof. John McInerney

by Colm

Recent events in Japan have reinvigorated the debate on nuclear power, so we invited Professor John McInerney from the Physics Dept. in UCC to give us a better insight into the subject. John gave us a wide ranging talk, covering the effects of nuclear radiation, the best known nuclear disasters, the future of nuclear power and the implications for Ireland.

“Microwaves in general are not harmful, including the ones in cell-phones and radars.”

Early in the talk, John dispelled with the idea of non-ionising radiation being responsible for detrimental health effects. ”Microwaves in general are not harmful, including the ones in cell-phones and radars. Unless you cook yourself. If you stood in front of a 10KW radio antenna it would be bad for you. It would serve you right. That’s Darwin’s principle at work”.

He also had some bracing thoughts on fossil fuels. “We are very bad statisticians. About 40% of people are killed by cardiovascular diseases, another 40% are killed by malignancy. Most cardiovascular events happen prematurely simply because we are breathing particulate matter that’s drenched in organic compounds or tars or carcinogens of one kind or another, and that’s mostly due to the burning of fossil fuels.”

John explained that radiation is all around us and that most of it is man-made. We will get exposed to anything between 20 and 50 millisieverts each year just through natural sources of radiation. Nuclear power facilities are designed not to contribute in any significant way to this background exposure and there is no way that, even under the most extreme conditions, that a nuclear power station can explode in a nuclear fireball.

The talk then turned to the major incidents that have played out over the past few decades. On Three Mile Island: “Nobody was killed. There was no excess mortality. No excess cases of cancer as far as anyone has determined. But what happened? The US quit building nuclear reactors. They build coal fired power plants instead, which are a million times worse”. On Chernobyl: “It was the worst, the most unforgivable, the most sloppy, the most base, the most vile - it was a combination of many different things, none of which should have ever happened. Maybe a few hundred people died as a result of excess exposure in Chernobyl. It’s a tragedy but it shouldn’t be the reason to shut down an entire industry”. On Fukushima: “Compared to Chernobyl, it’s like night and day. A 1960′s type accident, using 1960′s technology. The reactor containment vessels did what they were supposed to do, but it isn’t normal to put the spent fuel pools right beside the reactors”.

“You’ve got to know what you are doing. You can’t have amateur crews. You should not cut costs. If anyone is running nuclear power, it should not be a commercial company.

Nuclear technology is not risk free. “You’ve got to know what you are doing. You can’t have amateur crews. You should not cut costs. If anyone is running nuclear power, it should not be a commercial company. There should be no profit motive. It should be run by the government. It should be run according to the strictest standards”. He cited the US Navy, the biggest operators of nuclear power generators by far, who are not known to have had a single accident.

Pebble Bed reactor technology was cited as something that Ireland could get involved in if the political will was there. Pebble Bed reactors do not require coolants or reactants and they cannot go on fire. But this is unlikely to happen anytime soon. “There is no nuclear power, or nuclear physics, or nuclear engineering programme in this country, and there won’t be until the government lifts this ridiculous legal restriction on having nuclear power. If you compare what happened - if you look back to the 40′s and 50′s - where there was rural electrification and the building of Ardnacrusha, and the government turned to the universities and said they wanted all these people trained for the ESB - we want to start electrical engineering departments - go for it. And this is why we are where we are today. They need to do something similar. They are not even having the discussion.”

“Do whatever you can - put solar panels on the roofs, conserve where you can. You are always left with a couple of gigawatts that you have to generate.”

John is a proponent of green fuels, but with current technologies they won’t come close to meeting worldwide demand. ”Do whatever you can - put solar panels on the roofs, conserve where you can. You are always left with a couple of gigawatts that you have to generate. If you can’t use fossil fuels, you have to do something like this. It takes 20 years to build something like that, so if you are not deciding to do it now, by the time the 20 years are up and the lights are off, everybody is pointing fingers at each other. What’s the point? You are out of the game. You are back in the Stone Age.” He pointed to France, who have embraced non-fossil fuel technologies, including nuclear. “When the rest of us are in the dark, the French will be living the beautiful life”.

We would like to thank John again for speaking to us on this very important subject. It was a fascinating talk that deserves further discussion. We hope to have a video of his presentation up on our YouTube site in the next few weeks.

May 12, 2011

Announcing the Cork Skeptics in the Castle - May Event!

by Colm

Recent events in Japan have focused attention once again on radiation - what effect it can have and whether nuclear power is a viable solution for our growing energy needs. At our next meeting of Cork Skeptics in the Castle, Professor John McInerney will be giving a talk about radiation - what it is, what it does and doesn’t do, and how it impacts our lives.

(We’ll also be talking about conspiracy theories and that little matter of the end of the world on the 21st of May.)

About the speaker: John McInerney is Professor and Head of Physics at University College Cork, and also co-director of the opto-electronics group at the Tyndall National Institute. Before joining UCC he held academic positions at the University of New Mexico (USA) and the University of Cambridge, and is an adjunct professor at the University of Arizona.

He has also worked in industry, both in large photonics and electronics companies and in small start-ups. He received his BSc in Physics from University College Cork and PhD from Trinity College, Dublin.

———————————————————-

The talk will begin at 8pm on Friday May 20th, in Blackrock Castle Observatory. Everyone is welcome and the talk is free to attend.

Please see our Skeptics In The Castle page for directions to the Castle.


May 5, 2011

Herbal Medicines - AVAAZ have got it dead wrong

by Colm

On the 28th of April, AVAAZ, a very prominent campaigning group on the Internet, launched a petition to stop the EU from implementing a new directive concerning the distribution and sale of herbal medicines.

The directive has been implemented following long-standing concerns over the side-effects of certain herbal medicines, and a desire to provide more protection to the consumer. The directive came into force in 2004, with the marketing of non-licenced products permitted up to the 1st of May this year.

The legislation is quite watered down. It is not an outright ban. It does not apply to herbal products that have been around for more than 30 years. Products sold after consultation with a herbalist are exempted. Products already on sale can remain on the shelf until their expiry date. Crucially, the directive only covers product safety, not efficacy. No evidence from clinical trials needs to be presented, only evidence that the products are safe for use. This is a long way from the standards expected for medicinal products and would be more akin to the large number of directives setting out standards and proper codes of practice for food safety.

Opposition to the directive boils down to a reluctance within the traditional medicine / herbal medicine industry to have any standards imposed on them whatsoever. It’s an odd thing, therefore, that AVAAZ have taken such a hysterical position on the issue. Using the fallacious argument that people “have a right to choose among all remedies and medicines that can keep ourselves and our families healthy”, they have argued for a “massive outcry” against the EU’s “draconian measures”. As of time of writing they have succeeded in getting over 700,000 signatures on their website.

AVAAZ often gets it right. They campaigned relentlessly (and successfully) for the commuting of Sakineh Ashtiani’s death sentence by stoning at the hands of the Iranian Government. They have highlighted the plight of gay people in Africa. They have launched efforts to expose government corruption. All good stuff. Nevertheless, on a matter of basic health safety, citing the welfare of herbalists over the consumer, they have got it dead wrong.

For more information on the directive, check out Sinead’s blog entry.

* Image via US Army Korea - IMCOM (CC Licensed)

May 3, 2011

The Common Sense Fallacy

by Colm

“What do you mean? It makes total sense!”

“How do I know? It’s obvious! Even a child could understand it.”

One of the most common logical fallacies around is when people wish to persuade you of a fact by logic alone. The argument usually goes like this: in order to convince you of their point of view, they will tell you that their argument makes sense: and that this, on its own, is enough for it to be true. Here are some examples:-

George W Bush and some of his key aides were not in Washington at the time of 9/11. Some people believe that this is evidence of a government conspiracy, as it would have made sense for him to be as far away from the atrocities as possible.

The numbers 5,15,26,34, 35 and 43 are going to come up in the lottery because they have not appeared in any winning tickets for ages. It makes sense to pick these numbers because they are more likely to be coming up soon.

Poison Ivy causes a bad rash upon contact, so based on the homeopathic principle of “like cures like”, it makes sense that it should cure skin rashes.

Reality is smarter than you are

All of these ideas, at least superficially, seem to be based on logic; but logic on its own is not enough. The premises, or assumptions, need to be true too. In many cases, the premises can be hidden or not fully understood - even by the greatest experts on the subject. Throughout history, people have made statements of fact without understanding everything about the phenomenon, with bizarre results. Thus, it was possible to believe that the sun and the planets revolved around the Earth: it made sense because the Earth was assumed to be the centre of the universe. Doctors indulged in bloodletting because it made sense that illness was cause by fluid imbalances.

So, how can we move forward when all we have is logic and we don’t fully understand the premises? Fortunately, there is a hack. We can test it against reality. We can perform an experiment to see what actually happens or we can analyse the available evidence. If we are wrong in our assumptions, reality should be able to tell us.

Michelson and Morley’s famous “failed experiment“, where they they tried unsuccessfully to prove that the speed of light would vary depending on the direction of motion of our planet, was a great example of reality being in dispute with the conventional wisdom of the day. By discovering that light had the same speed in all directions, they were able to show that the common sense of the time (i.e. that light needed a medium - aether - in which to propagate) was demonstrably wrong. Other forces, not then fully understood, were at play. Thousands of experiments like this have given rise to our current understanding of reality. They have often shown our universe to be very different to what common sense would have expected.

The nonsense claim doesn’t work either

Another aspect of the Common Sense Fallacy is the idea that if it does not appear to make sense, it cannot, therefore, be true*. Just as common sense, on its own, cannot be used to establish if something is true, neither can it be used, on its own, to dismiss a proposition out of hand. Creationists will invoke the ultimate 747 gambit to claim that evolution does not make sense (that it’s as unlikely to happen as if a tornado constructed an intact 747 capable of flying around the world) when the evidence (and logic) comprehensively attests to its truth. Some people will claim that global warming doesn’t make sense after experiencing a few cold winters. Quantum mechanics makes no sense at all, even to experts in the field, yet it can be tested with incredible accuracy each and every time.

If in doubt, test it out

Because reality can often confound even the greatest minds, common sense, on its own, is not a good indicator of the truth or falsity of a claim. When someone tries to convince you of the truth of a claim using an appeal as to how “sensible” it seems, be sceptical. To better substantiate a claim you need to be shown reliable evidence. Don’t be fooled. If in doubt, test it out.

* This fallacy is also known as the Argument from Ignorance.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers