HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: Greenpeace press releases -- fact or fiction?
Date: 25 Jan 1993 01:54:05 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1993Jan24.202500.2302@truffula.sj.ca.us>, cls@truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer) writes:
>In article <1jtullINN2sr@gap.caltech.edu>, Carl J Lydick writes:
>>In article <1jr5ceINN16a@gap.caltech.edu>, Carl J Lydick writes:
>>>For the innumerates like Jym Dyer among you...
>>It's rather telling that Victor-the-idiot Yackadamn chose to flame me over my
>>presumption that GreenHype ...
>
>Why is it necessary to throw personal insults?

That wasn't a personal insult.  It was simply a statement of Dyer's
demonstrated innumeracy.  For example, in the discussion we had a while back
about GreenHype's press release concerning the detection of Pu on beaches near
Sellafield, Jym never seemed to catch on to the fact that the amount of
plutonium was important, nor to the fact that GreenHype was once again
propagandizing without providing any real information by issuing that release
without stating anything about concentrations.

>Is hatred *ever*
>constructive?  Is it only my imagination or do Greenpeace detractors
>resort to insults and personal abuse much more frequently than
>Greenpeace subscribers?  What does abusive language say about the
>speaker's personal values?

It says, in my case, that I'm fed up with GreenHype's incessant use of
misleading press releases, and of those who promulgate them.

>
>>for example, the release posted by Jym a couple of months ago that made
>>a big thing about the fact that plutonium had been detected on the beaches near
>>Sellafield, but neglected to say anything at all about concentrations).
>
>The scandal is that plutonium was released at all, not in what
>concentration it was released.  It shows the plant is not being
>operated responsibly.

Yup.  Yet another innumerate.  How much Pu was found?  It doesn't matter,
you say?  I see.  It makes no difference whether there was only a single atom
of Pu on the entire beach or whether the entire beach was plated with metallic
Pu, according to your claim.  Neither of these extremes was likely to be the
case, but you innumerate prattlings don't distinguish between them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: myuffe@ilx018.intel.com (Yuffe Marcelo)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Urban environment quality and population migration
Date: 24 Jan 93 12:29:32 GMT
Organization: Intel Israel (74) Ltd.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ilx069.intel.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

I'm interested on articles about how the environment degradation affects the big
modern cities growth.

I'm specially interested on population migration to the peripheria as a
response to city side effects like smog and noise.

Please send any info regarding that issue to myuffe@iil.intel.com
From: Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: META: Carl Lydick Gets Personal
Date: 25 Jan 1993 12:49:04 GMT
Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line
	<1993Jan24.202500.2302@truffula.sj.ca.us>
	<1jvh7tINNjtu@gap.caltech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu

>>>> For the innumerates like Jym Dyer among you...
>>> It's rather telling that Victor-the-idiot Yackadamn chose to
>>> flame me over my presumption that GreenHype ...
>> Why is it necessary to throw personal insults?
> That wasn't a personal insult.

=o= Funny, it looks just like one.  Actually, it looks like one
personal insult towards me, name-calling towards Greenpeace, and
one of each for Mr. Yodaiken.

> It was simply a statement of Dyer's demonstrated innumeracy.
> For example, in the discussion we had a while back . . .
> Jym never seemed to catch on to the fact that the amount of
> plutonium was important . . .

=o= Seeing as how I did not elect to engage in that particular
discussion, I can't see how I could possibly have demonstrated
this innumeracy.

=o= And reposting the press releases does not count as engaging
in the discussion.  I alter the fullname and the message-IDs on
those postings to make it obvious (to any literate person, at
least), that the statements therein are not mine.

=o= And I don't engage in discussions where there's nothing
worthwhile to say.  A flame from Mr. Lydick demanding to know
a missing amount of plutonium is a classic example of a waste
of time.  It is as completely pointless to ask anyone in the
nuclear industry how much plutonium they've lost as it is to
respond to such flaming.
    <_Jym_>
Newsgroups: talk.environment,alt.politics.greens
From: archer@elysium.esd.sgi.com (Archer Sully)
Subject: Re: Ca. Green Platform, Ecology Section (was Re: Gas Tax?)
Organization:  Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:57:43 GMT

In <1993Jan20.164149.1890@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
*
*The point is that such subsidies, like all subsidies, perform a social
*role. If we decide that the benefits of these subsidies are outweighed
*by the negatives, then we can eliminate them.

If I go into detail refuting this statement I would get little else done
today.  However, the Economist had a rather thorough analysis of the 
"social good" of agricultural subsidy a few issues back (late December,
methinks) that is well worth reading.  

-- archer
From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 15:04:11 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: Not Necessarily All or Nothing (was: True Costs . . .)
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <Jym.25Jan1993.0251@naughty-peahen> Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu> writes:
>In article <1993Jan13.202957.1308@inel.gov>, dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose)
>writes:
>> Maybe that is good and well where you live.  However, where I
>> live, there is about three feet of snow on the ground (more on
>> the way) . . .
>
>=o= Every single day of the year?  Could not a bike be employed
>on the days when there aren't three feet of snow on the ground?
>I don't remember anyone suggesting an all-or-nothing deal with
>bikes.  (But I will point out that that's essentially how I
>live -- and have managed to live in snowy New England states.)
>
>> Plus, at times only a big 4x4 will get you where you want to
>> go and in an emergency then that big 4x4 gas guzzler people
>> like you deride is literally a life-saver.
>
>=o= True as that might be, I still don't see why one has to
>hop in the 4x4 gas guzzler for a trip to the local convenience
>store.  

>I certainly see more of them at the local Kwik-E-Mart
>than in life-threatening situations.

Ah, but this is in California, the land of maximum automotive
transportation, growth and development as a God, and the last bastion of
externalizing energy costs.

Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: The Real Challenge
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1993Jan25.180524.788@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:21:12

I see these "scientists" are looking for troubles and not for ways of
overcoming them.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: Greenpeace's alternative refrigerant
Date: 25 Jan 1993 07:57:00 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <Jym.24Jan1993.1942@naughty-peahen>, Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu> writes:
>> Thus it is billed as the "first completely CFC- and FC-free
>> refrigerator in the world."
>
>=o= Ouch.  I don't have the Greenpeace press release on this
>around anymore, but I recall it emphasizing energy efficiency
>quite strongly -- indeed, that was the point of the venture.
>No doubt it actually said it was that it was the first such
>*energy-efficient* refrigerator.

Sure, Jym.  If GreenHype lied to us, make up your own fucking lie to cover for
them.  You and Yackadamn ought to get together.  Between the two of you, you
might have *ONE* intellectually honest bone in your bodies

>=o= Somehow I know that there's about to be a deluge of articles
>posted by reactionaries looking for any excuse to flame about
>Greenpeace, even on the basis of second- or third-hand summari-
>zations of their actual statements.

Gee.  How about just criticizing their commercials and their press releases?
I know, they've just *GOT* to gloss over important weaknesses in their
arguments, since most of us are too fucking stupid to believe their propaganda,
right?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Xref: sparky talk.environment:5805 sci.environment:14894 alt.sources.wanted:2125
From: zaigi@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: talk.environment,sci.environment,alt.sources.wanted
Subject: The Earth Charter produced at UNCED Conference
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:41:19 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada



Dear Netters,

At the UNCED Conference, NGO Forum produced a documentation titled 
"The Earth Charter". Where can I get the documentation? It will be
the best if there is any online sources I can approach.

Any info will be very much appreciated.

Nick at zaigi@ac.dal.ca
From: jamesh@aisb.ed.ac.uk (James Hammerton)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: NEWS: Oil Use Could be Cut by Half in 40 Years, Says Report
Keywords: energy environment oil press
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:20:14 GMT
Reply-To: jamesh@aisb.ed.ac.uk (James Hammerton)
Organization: Dept AI, Edinburgh University, Scotland

In article <1993Jan20.185958.5665@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>In article <1993Jan19.204206.3708@pmafire.inel.gov> russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown) writes:
>>
>>Somehow, the identities of the future energy resources were omitted from
>>this posting.  GP has apparently promised us a "free lunch", but is
>>keeping the menu a secret.  The transportation component should be a howler.
>
>Press releases rarely contain such details.  It would be nice if
>critiques of these plans were based on the contents of the report,
>rather than the press release.
>-- 

Precisely the point I've been trying to make!

James



--
*  James Hammerton               *  If Pascal is equivalent to the     *
*  Email: jamesh@uk.ac.ed.aisb   *  mini-metro,then ML is the concept  *
*                                *  car where steering is done         *
*                                *  recursively using the gearstick.   *
From: constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power Plants in Eastern Europe
Date: 27 Jan 93 05:59:35 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <20100@mindlink.bc.ca> Desiree_Bradley@mindlink.bc.ca (Desiree Bradley) writes:
>The people in eastern Europe probably do not have easy choices.  
>east of Poland burn that coal, or coal like it, they do have a problem.
>However, Chernobyl's design and poor safety record hardly inspires confidence
>in eastern European nuclear power plants.  And then there are those others
>similarly designed and operated.
>However, as far as I know, there are no nuclear power plants in Poland.

As a side note, these are the current operating plants in eastern European 
and Unified countries: (Nuclear News, Feb 1992)      

* units are electricity producers, and greater than 30 MWe.
* LGRs are liguid-cooled, graphite-moderated

Nation          # units          Net MWe
-----------------------------------------
Bulgaria            6              3538       All PWRs
Czecho-Slovakia     8              3264       All PWRs
Germany (kinda)    21             22408       7 BWRs, rest are PWRs
Hungary             4              1695       All PWRs
Kazakhstan          1               135       LMFBR, also a desalination plant
Lithuania           2              2760       LGRs
Russia             24             17751       1 LMFBR, rest are PWRs and LGRs
Ukraine            15             13020       3 LGRs, rest are PWRs
Yugoslavia          1               620       PWR

Tino
-- 
     "Here are the young men, the weight on their shoulders..." - J.D.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Purdue University School of Nuclear Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:07:50 GMT
Subject: The Real "Right to Life"
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Date: 22 Jan 93 12:44:38 GMT
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences

In article <1993Jan19.190701.2617@netcom.com> ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II) writes:
}
}	Government and private think-tank studies have seriously enter-
}tained notions that would dramatically alter the landscape and ecology of
}the central U.S. to address the coming water shortage.  Pipelines and
}aqueducts to divert water from the Mississippi River have been proposed.
}I live in California - we have a water diversion project here that sends
}Sacramento River water south to (among other places) Los Angeles.  The
}silting in the River has been catastrophic for the Sacramento River and
}the San Francisco Bay.  The reduced outflow of fresh water into the 
}San Francisco Bay has made it inhospitable for many species of fish.
}The reduced water flow in Northern California rivers has all but elimi-
}nated the salmon industry in California.  

You omit the fact that agriculture didn't build the State Water Project,
the State did.

The problem with water in CA, and in any coastal state at least, isn't
drought, but public policy.  Water finance and delivery is monopolized
or subsidized at the municipal level.  In many places, service is so bad
that bottled-water companies make fortunes in spite of these coercive
barriers to entry.

We have plenty of water in the Pacific Ocean that could be desalinated and
sold.  What we don't have is public policy that permits a free market in
water.


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
From: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com (Joel Hanes)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: "A Quarter Billion Years" (Greenpeace Press Releases)
Keywords: rebuttal
Date: 22 Jan 93 21:00:39 GMT
Reply-To: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation  Sunnyvale California

I wrote:
># 
># I quit reading GreenPeace press releases
># as a result of my conversations with Jason, and because of
># the high volume and low information content of the postings.
># I imagine that many other talk.environment folks who
># are competent to detect such errors have done likewise.
>
  jamesh@aifh.ed.ac.uk (James Hammerton) writes:
>
>I have usually only skimmed these postings until recently when I felt that
>the Greenpeace bashing was becoming very strong, and I felt that I should
>try to defend them when and where I could back it up with evidence. Recent
>postings of press releases don't seem to have been as bad as you make out,
>but I'll admit to having missed a lot of earlier ones. The trouble was that
>I saw some discussions where the followups seemed as bad as many on this
>group feel the press releases are ...

agreed.  I skip most of the "GreenPeace rebuttal" articles
as well, for the same reason -- as you point out, some of
them are nearly as strident and content-free as the GP
press releases they address.

However, I have found that Russ Brown, Mr. Parsons, Jim
Hurst, and a few others actually provide hard information,
with citations, and I try to read their postings closely,

>Finally I would like to ask(out of interest) what people's opinions on
>other environmental groups are and why? Specifically the following:

(list deleted)

It's my perception that The Wilderness Society, The Nature Conservancy,
the absurdly-named Natural Resources Defense Council, and,
in California, Citizens for a Better Environment are doing
top-flight work on environmental issues, motivated by an
accurate understanding of the science, and a pragmatic
approach to politics.  I'd say that the Sierra Club and 
National Audubon society are almost as good; I give money
to all these folks.

Your mileage may, of course, vary.

---
Joel Hanes
Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: fskanes@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: WASTE MANAGEMENT
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:56:08 GMT

Hello, I am trying to find out some information on waste management in 
Canada and the U.S. I am particularily interested in finding out about
incineration and large scale dumping. Here in Newfoundland we are now
in the situation of political immobility concerning such projects.

Does anyone also know anything about the practices of a company called 
Hollinger? Any help would be greatly appreciated.      


________________________________________________________________________________
Fred Skanes(fskanes@kean.ucs.mun.ca)      WHADDAYAAT??
Department of Anthropology
Memorial University of Newfoundland
St. John's, Newfoundland
A1C 5S7
E-MAIL--FSKANES@KEAN.UCS.MUN.CA                                         
______________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Subject: Re: The Real Challenge
Organization: Precipitating Pendulums Postal Party Poopers
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 18:05:24 GMT

In article <JMC.93Jan23183736@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>Was our life impoverished by finding a substitute for the whale oil
>used in lamps?
>
>It is conceivable that we shall have to substitute
>for high quality wood, which is indeed being rapidly used up.  More
>likely, we will succeed in getting high quality wood from tree farms.
>As long as there is plenty of grain, there is no problem with meat.
>Should we need to devote the present grain land to producing food
>directly consumed by humans, then we can use synthetic carbohydrates
>and bacterial proteins to feed our cattle and chickens.  As for fish,
>note that a substantial fraction of the salmon sold is already farm
>raised.

Cameron and Jym have already dealt with the wood issue. I merely note
that most scientists working with salmon and trout farms are
desperately worried about the "long term" potential (as in 10-20
years) of such farms. A researcher in Oregon is studying, for
instance, why the feeding habits on such farms might make farm raised
fish much more suspectible to genetic damage, predation and social
conflict. On the NW coast of Scotland, the word is that accidental
releases of farm-raised fish guarantee the release of genetic disease
into the wild population. There have been several mass killings of
trout farm stock because they had become so sick.

Maybe John doesn't mind the idea of eating these things. I do.

As for grains in general, many agencies, including those of the UN,
have raised serious alarms about the diminishing genetic stock of
grains. In S.E. Asia, rice phenotypes have diminished from more than
50 major strains down to less than 10 in less than 50 years. The major
players in genetic conservation are seed companies, who see incredible
potential for profit if and when the rest of the world's grain crop
suffers a major blight.

Maybe John doesn't mind being dependent on a handful of grain strains
and even fewer companies in order to feed 35 billion people. I do.

>As for the inspirational message, when the content is mistaken,
>flowery rhetoric can't save the message.

No disagreement here. But we've noted much the same about your
arithmetic too, John.

-- paul
-- 
hybrid rather than pure; compromising rather than clean;    | Militant Agnostic
distorted rather than straightforward; ambiguous rather than| I Don't Know
articulated; both-and rather than either-or; the difficult  |   and You Don't
unity of inclusion rather than the easy unity of exclusion. |   Know Either
From: Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: recycling and recyclables
Date: 25 Jan 1993 12:04:12 GMT
Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Keywords: recycle

> I would like to know if there is a newsgroup(s) out there that
> pertain to recycling especially for an office environment.

=o= None _per_se_, but the alt.save.the.earth newsgroup has
carried such information in the past.

=o= A book recommended there by myself and by others is the
EarthWorks "50 Things Your Business Can Do to Save the Earth."
It's chock-full of information.
    <_Jym_>
Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 15:40:48 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: 11/92 interview w/Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass, author of "Secret Fallout"
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <1993Jan22.075836.13640@truffula.sj.ca.us> cls@truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer) writes:
>
>Here's an example of a specious appeal to arithmetic, nonsense due to bad
>input data.
>
>In article <1993Jan21.015635.18905@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>
> constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
>>According to this calculation, there should be NO ONE ALIVE IN THE U.S., due
>>to natural background radiation.
>>
>>Here's the numbers:
>>
>>The collective dose of TMI on the U.S.: 3300 person-rem (best estimate)
>>                                        2000-5000 person-rem (estimate range)
>>
>...
>>By Sternglass' approximation, the death count from nature:
>>                                     70,000,000,000 dead Americans in 10 years
>
>
>Trouble with this analysis is the "collective dose of TMI" is actually
>unknown because the amount of radioactive material released is unknown.
>The instruments at TMI were disabled during some releases and
>off the scale during others.
>
>
>* Any problem soluble solely by arithmetic is unimportant.
>--
>Cameron Spitzer

The estimates of collective dose are based on, among other things, the
recorded data from TLD's that were placed in the environs.  The
uncertainty reflects potential errors.  Using the actual releases to
project doses is a bit less "certain".

Measured depositions in soil and vegetation, not to mention actual
measurements of radionuclide levels in live bodies, can of course
provide excellent secondary estimates of the effects of releases.

BTW, the detailed evaluations of health impacts in the region indicate
that there have been none.  Psychological effects, anxiety, tension,
etc., have been observed.
Newsgroups: talk.environment