home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16 / NN_1992_16.iso / spool / sci / environm / 9703 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-07-21  |  1.3 KB
  1. Xref: sparky sci.environment:9703 sci.physics:11292 sci.energy:3489
  2. Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics,sci.energy
  3. Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!CSD-NewsHost!jmc
  4. From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
  5. Subject: Re: ZERO Nuclear impact (was: Is car pooling for real? etc)
  6. In-Reply-To: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU's message of Tue, 21 Jul 1992 20:23:20 GMT
  7. Message-ID: <JMC.92Jul21152954@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
  8. Sender: news@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU
  9. Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
  10. Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
  11. References: <#bcm43a@dixie.com> <10959@cis.rand.org> <1992Jul20.231007.696@nmt.edu>
  12.     <1992Jul21.202320.6596@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
  13. Date: 21 Jul 92 15:29:54
  14. Lines: 15
  15.  
  16. I think the original poster was mistaken in writing "zero
  17. environmental impact".  He should have said "negligible or small
  18. environmental impact".  This would have promoted a discussion of what
  19. impacts are too small to be taken seriously (negligible) and which
  20. are merely small in comparison with humanity's other problems.
  21.  
  22. My own opinion is that the environmental impacts of nuclear power
  23. that have mentioned are mostly negligible, while a few of them
  24. are merely small.
  25.  
  26. --
  27. John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
  28. *
  29. He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
  30.  
  31.