Subject: RE: Nuclear Accidents
From: "Bill Howell. Retired from NRCan. now in Alberta Canada" <>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 15:32:55 -0700
To: "Gordon Ball. PEng Aircraft Landing Nav Systems. Ottawa" <>

I think Stephen Harper is one of the greatest Canadian Prime Ministers of the modern era.  His "democratic fault" is that he doesn't buy votes and pander to the [parasites, crooks, self-interest groups, broken theory] types as much as he should.  I know we disagree on Stephen Harper, so we'll just leave it at that.

You should know me well enough by now to know that I am probably, by far, the least guillible of anyone you've met - I don't even agree with myself, and I sure as heck don't "believe" scientists, science, or the overwhelmingly huge mainstream scientific consensus.  My science hobbies are split between :
  1. Neural Networks and Evolutionary Computation -  I just so happens that I submitted my annual Professional Engineering report on my "Continuing Professional Development".  Here are two examples of normal peer reviews that I recently did (I submitted a beauty this morning, but won't be posting it - these are confidential so names have to be removed) :
  2. Studing and modelling the catastrophic failure of [rational, logical, scientific] reasoning by essentially all government and academic scientists (my Principles of [Locality, Generality,  Universality, Irrelevance]) and the HUGELY [dishonest, dysfunctional, delinquent, hypocritical, back-stabbing, cowardly] thinking & behaviours that accompany this.  I'm 3 years overdue to do another series of documents on that, but ongoing obligations keep pushing that off into the future.  The only "document-style posting I did (in very incomplete, unedited form) is :   "30Dec10 Lies, Damned Lies, and Scientists",%20Damned%20Lies,%20and%20Scientists/_Lies,%20damned%20lies,%20and%20scientists.html
  3. Working to over-throw the mainstream theories like [relativity, quantum mechanics, plate tectonics, history, etc, etc].  As a recent (minor) example :   "12Dec2014 Don Scott's Birkeland current magnetic structure, Howell's review and comments",%20review%20and%20comments.pdf
This same attitude of mine applies even more to other areas, especially [humanities, economics, markets, history, military, politics]. 

There is radiation EVERYWHERE, and always has been - natural and man-made (yes - even cave men).  That has never been the point.  The entire question revolves around [what type, source, how much, biological effects].  Statements outside of that context are usually pure garbage, which summarizes very nicely almost the entire [reporting, analysis, lobby groups, so-called environmentalists & health nuts, me too] on many issue like nuclear energy and radiation. 

That human error always exists, as well as the consequences thereof, is a given and is well recognized.  That excessive reduction of risk is extremely net-negative, even for the presumed problem being tackled, is rarely understood.  That is, until people do things like take money out of their own pocket to do things, which changes their thinking radically, but seemingly without changing their general view. 

I am less "reactionary" to bullshit thinking than in my past, but as you can tell, it is still a subject to get me going.  I have to laugh at myself, and at least I take the general failure of thinking, belifs as a given.  Scientists that run into stone-walls over their own research sometimes consult me - one of the things I tell them (as just two day ago!), is that it is NORMAL that breakthrough thinking cannot be accepted by mainstream scientists, and won't be published.   It's the internet age - start your own community and publish yourself.  Another guy is doing just this - and is establising a "Science Dissident" film festival after no festival would accept his film trashing Einstein's theories.   You yourself did something similar with your support groups - if you had waited for [approval, permission, conceptual support] by normal experts, you could never even have started. 

I amNOT looking to find the truth, nor to be convinced of an argument.  I follow an approach of "Multiple Conflicting Hypothesis", and the answers are of far less interesting to me than the questions.  Hosting and adhering to completely conflicting concepts is not at all an issue for me -  this is a HUGE difference compared to pretty well everyone else I have met. 


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Nuclear Accidents
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 17:38:14 +0000
From: Gordon Ball <>
To: Bill Howell. Retired from NRCan. now in Alberta Canada <>

Dear Bill. In the three nuclear reactor accidents I mentioned I believe at least some radiation was released into the environment. We could get into a protracted debate about how much was released and how serious it was. However as more and more reactors are built there are bound to be more accidents. You can never eliminate human error. I hope you are not gullible enough to believe Stephen Harper’s propaganda. Gordon

Sent from Windows Mail