1 million people dead as a result of Chernobyl. Hanford B reactor underground vats containing 150 million gallons of radioactive waste - now leaking into aquifers near columbia river. Uranium mining on the banks of Colorado River. Depleted uranium shells deforming children in felugia and poisoning the environment for millions of years to come. Sellafield waste irradiating the oceans for decades now. Ageing U.S reactors failing.
How much is enough? What does it take to stop this insanity.
@telemetry9 Dr Helen Caldicott's statements don't stand up to any kind of scrutiny. She cherry picks information for dodgy sources and can't back up her claims when challenged. Monbiot may be a journalist rather than a scientist but he is very true to the scientific ideals of openly referencing statements, showing clearly where he gets his information from, and most importantly, changing his assumptions when evidence irrefutably contradicts them. Caldicott is a joke.
I'm willing to bet. If you lived near a reactor - you'd be ant-nuclear. Undisclosed leaks. But you can't see the human cost. You can't see the broken lives CAUSED by this stuff poisoning our planet. 989,000 human beings dead - because of chernobyl? FACT. Look at those poor children in the ukraine but of course - I know you won't.
Helen dares to tell the truth.
Let people make up their own minds. But oh yes they can't, because the truth is being withheld. Fukashima never happened. Wake up.
@telemetry9 Don't patronise me. Your ignorance is astounding. You have no idea about where I live - and as it goes I do live reasonably close to not one, but TWO nuclear powers stations & I'm fine - because I'm not an idiot. What has Caldicott got to fear? Failing book sales if she doesn't push her viewpoint. I've read these reports - they've been discredited.The truth that's "withheld" is that there are more radiation-related deaths from coal than from nuclear. Including Chernobyl.
Dr Helen Caldicott is the closest thing to a alzherimers patient not yet diagnosed I have yet seen in my life. She has absolutely no sense of reality; and her statements on radioisotopes and radiation imply as if it was some sort of contagious pathogen rather than an inert material subject to dispertion accordying to the laws of physics.
Scientists from many disciplines have reviewed the book, and have accused Plimer of misrepresenting sources,[34][35] misusing data,[36][34][37] and engaging in conspiracy theories.[38][39] They describe the book as unscientific,[40] and containing numerous errors from which Plimer draws false conclusions.[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] -- en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Ian_Plimer
Come on, Manbiot: great that you're fighting the AGW-deniers, but drop the nuclear power.
Here's a word for you to learn: ENTROPY! Second Law of Thermo. The greater ORDER you create (to grow a human, grow a cow, build a nuclear plant) comes at the expense of greater DISORDER elsewhere. The only order-creating process on the planet is photosynthesis. Your nuclear plants that you love create disorder (i.e. unusuable non-work energy) faster than plants create order.
you need to study the first, second and third laws of thermodynamics and have them explained to you. Your misunderstanding of basic physical principles is frightening.
@52111centrumcz Well, certainly NOT by you. You know absolutely nothing about them. I doubt you're a vegan, like me. For instance, if you understood that growing more complex beings (cows, pigs, etc) to eat costs far more energy and wastes more cropland than eating the crops directly is a result of the 2nd Law, then you'd be vegan. A very practical application of it.
And, yes, Helen Caldicott DOES need to be more self-critical about medical effects of radiation. However, she's still
If you would know anything about human metabolism, you would realize a small amount of meat is useful, especially to young and growing individuals as it helps them during puberty to supply energy and protein. The fact in the western world too much meat is consumed is a non-related matter.
Caldicott knows less about radiation and its effects on the human body than I do - and that's astounding because I'm a physics major, not a MD. For example she does not mention biological half-life.
@52111centrumcz I never claim that small amounts of meat are harmful to humans. I disagree with many overstated health claims of health-vegans. But, that doesn't change the fact that any amount of meat is still GREAT harm to the animals, unless you've figured out a way to extract 1 hamburger painlessly from a cow while leaving the rest of the cow intact.
Those animals are raised for food - if they were not raised for food, then they would not even exist, because we would exterminate anything on the fields. Not to mention a proper balanced agriculture using a symbiosis of animals, fields and recycling dung as fertilizer (which is not used today, unfortunately) is much closer to the natural balance than what you propose (not having animals due to ethical concerns).
? So you advocate not raising livestock and raising crops only, which results in extremely unbalanced monocultures extremely succeptible to pest attacks and disease?
A combined holistic approach where animals are raised on farms that grow crops and are used as natural source of fertilizer (and the dung can be used to create methane for cogen and power)
@52111centrumcz right overall about idiotically moronic it is to build these massively complex nuclear systems that require round the clock babysitting and monitoring.
Let alone the waste.
I visited a small windmill utility (5 huge windmills) on a tour. ONE guy was needed to maintain it.
You don't know shit about basic physics or how the world works.
You are an idiot. 5 windmills x 1.3 Megawatts each and comparing that to a 2Gw reactors - you would need 2000 windmills running at 100% capacity factor to replace one large nuke. A well run nuke can require a crew of 100 and has a higher contribution to the stability and power of a grid than 4 thousand windmills > because the average capacity factor of windmills is around 30%, while it is near 95% for modern reactors. That would mean 800 people for the windmills to replace on reactor.
High school biology describes her plants consume all the available carbon dioxide from the air to form new life on earth. Carbon dioxide has been static in the air for last two centuries. Only idiots don't understand this.
@JonThm "plants consume all the available carbon dioxide from the air"?! Plimer must have taught you biology. That's not just wrong: it's obviously insane.
You feel comfortable stating insane statements like that? Frightening.
I love they Prof Pilmer throws up the great cause of money to defend his denalist position. I'm sure the oil industry executives havn't money in mind when funding the denialist campaign.
Monbiot is a nuclear PR robot who is as full of shit as any other lobbyist asshole I've met. Why not interview someone who is not a totally bought slave-bitch to industry? Please... next show...
1/ It's funny how all the mendacious maggots come from the denialist side: Plimer, Monkton, Carter...all repeating their unsubstantiated crap ( Earth hasn't warmed since 1998, volcanoes emit more CO2 etc.). And how can we blame our super astute denialista for not checking whether those facts even have a whiff of credibility. After all, they did uncover that fiendish, socialist IPCC plot to starve our plants of much needed CO2
2/ and ruin our economy, and in the process turning us into bicycle riding, sardine-eating beggars. I mean, rooting out those liberal conspiracies is hard work: there's no time for checking facts. Imagine all our beautiful trees gasping for CO2 ; imagine when they're all dead; imagine a house full of cast-iron and plastic furniture! _ what a horrible thought.
If anyone is interested in a thorough debunking of Plimer, google "Ian Enting, Plimer". And a bag of doughnuts for deniers putting their hands up, in recognition of how far out of your comfort zone you would be putting yourself. Only kidding; don't email me asking for your doughnuts. Do it out of intellectual curiosity; treat your brain cells to a new sensation. I just hope the shock doesn't kill them all, hahaha...
@MrPincoNico High school biology describes her plants consume all the available carbon dioxide from the air to form new life on earth. Carbon dioxide has been static in the air for last two centuries. Only idiots don't understand this
ppl know wat they have to do and ppl see with there own eye's wat's going on and wen it all come's down to it there no amount ov money tht can cover the bill so yes i agree we are fucked..................
both points are right, we are fucking up the climate, but all our 'leaders' care about is turning a good crisis into a profit, so the movement latches onto certain evidence and grows, in protest of the governments taxing approach to the situation. we're fucked either way, just rebel, rebel quietly, but always be rebelling.
Almost nobody thinks that global warming is an organised conspiracy. People think that the scientists are geniune but are wrong. They have been given financial incentives to find evidence of global warming because previously being green was seen to be a vote winner. As climatology is not a hard science they will find whatever they are looking for. Businesses and government don't care whether the theories are right or wrong and only want to make money / taxes out of them.
Not only does the ludicrous claim that a sapient species of earth could actually produce more Co2 than the largest natural pumps of fossils -volcanoes- is a slap in the face to industry and it throws out the scientific method's objectivity (science's ten commandments) for far-left subjective babbling. Our planet isn't a liberal... lol. It went through several extinction cycles, ice ages and warming. And it's still going strong - bright blue skies.
@quidnick , i find it actually quite possible, that 150-170 years of industrial development, exponentially rising populations, cutting down of natural CO2 filters (rain forests) can polute more that volcanoes. it sounds pretty dumb to think that what we do in the world effects nothing. Volcanoes only errupt for maybe a couple days at most, as you know, power plants don't shut down, they keep pumping gases into the air. ur right that Ice ages and warming cycles do happen, not at this speed tho
I don't care about the politics of climate change, and seeing as how the individual's say doesn't matter in the eyes of these crooks... why should I? Why should the general public? There are more important things to attend to (like a debt crisis to start off.)
Plimer is correct: Follow the money. If, and it's still a Big IF, man made global warming is affecting the due course of climate change, all the dough in the world can't & won't reverse the natural course of change that we call climate. All global warming shills should find another environmental crisis, one that's susceptible to human intervention & improvement. These are the same capitalists that saw an imminent threat in the 70's with global cooling. Same bunch, same game. Wise up people!
Even if humanity has an impact, and it probably does to some degree, the system of carbon taxing and offsets in no way solves the problem; it just enriches the 1% and Al Gore.
calling critics "deniers" is a typical leftist tactic of namecalling. its called "repressive tolerance".
don't forget that al gore and his buddies got a economic interest in pushing the so called carbon trade. its a whole new way of ripping people off and making a load of money in the process
@happosai27 It's nothing to do with "the left", Al Gore, or semantics. It's about with the survival of civilization as we know it. The worldwide scientific community is overwhelmingly sure that this is happening. It's complex, but it's beyond doubt. The scientists are already using the scientific method, they are already the "critics". People who deny the facts here are no better than creationists, and even more reprehensible.
1 million people dead as a result of Chernobyl. Hanford B reactor underground vats containing 150 million gallons of radioactive waste - now leaking into aquifers near columbia river. Uranium mining on the banks of Colorado River. Depleted uranium shells deforming children in felugia and poisoning the environment for millions of years to come. Sellafield waste irradiating the oceans for decades now. Ageing U.S reactors failing.
How much is enough? What does it take to stop this insanity.
telemetry9 1 month ago
incredible... this must have been really frustrating!
solmyrgarde 1 month ago
Ian Plimer - Fail.
angharadbw 1 month ago
@telemetry9 Dr Helen Caldicott's statements don't stand up to any kind of scrutiny. She cherry picks information for dodgy sources and can't back up her claims when challenged. Monbiot may be a journalist rather than a scientist but he is very true to the scientific ideals of openly referencing statements, showing clearly where he gets his information from, and most importantly, changing his assumptions when evidence irrefutably contradicts them. Caldicott is a joke.
angharadbw 1 month ago
I'm willing to bet. If you lived near a reactor - you'd be ant-nuclear. Undisclosed leaks. But you can't see the human cost. You can't see the broken lives CAUSED by this stuff poisoning our planet. 989,000 human beings dead - because of chernobyl? FACT. Look at those poor children in the ukraine but of course - I know you won't.
Helen dares to tell the truth.
Let people make up their own minds. But oh yes they can't, because the truth is being withheld. Fukashima never happened. Wake up.
telemetry9 1 month ago
@telemetry9 Don't patronise me. Your ignorance is astounding. You have no idea about where I live - and as it goes I do live reasonably close to not one, but TWO nuclear powers stations & I'm fine - because I'm not an idiot. What has Caldicott got to fear? Failing book sales if she doesn't push her viewpoint. I've read these reports - they've been discredited.The truth that's "withheld" is that there are more radiation-related deaths from coal than from nuclear. Including Chernobyl.
angharadbw 1 month ago
If the world is going to suffer a cautionary approach seems prudent. What's in it for the polluters?
NeilCB1 1 month ago
this is like a debate between stalin and hitler on the morals of euthanasia. One as terrifying as the other. Both equally full of twaddle.
Dr.Helen Caldicott is the closest thing to the truth.
telemetry9 1 month ago
@telemetry9
Dr Helen Caldicott is the closest thing to a alzherimers patient not yet diagnosed I have yet seen in my life. She has absolutely no sense of reality; and her statements on radioisotopes and radiation imply as if it was some sort of contagious pathogen rather than an inert material subject to dispertion accordying to the laws of physics.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
Prof. Ian Plimer - what an idiot.
cliffovski 1 month ago
All life on earth is supported by plants metabolising carbon dioxide and excrete ink oxygen
JonThm 2 months ago
Smirking is such bad look on a paid goon
shakypam 2 months ago
Investigate and prosecute climate criminals: Exxon Exposed : bit . ly/9BiKgt -- Koch Industries funds lies: bit . ly/aj9PVU -- Boycott Koch Industries' many products (listed here): bit . ly/hpyDH9
gregjalbert 2 months ago
Scientists from many disciplines have reviewed the book, and have accused Plimer of misrepresenting sources,[34][35] misusing data,[36][34][37] and engaging in conspiracy theories.[38][39] They describe the book as unscientific,[40] and containing numerous errors from which Plimer draws false conclusions.[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] -- en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Ian_Plimer
gregjalbert 2 months ago
This is amazing.
Now you see how Hitler got in?
tremben 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Q: "You said 16 times in one chapter that this decade was cooler than previous"
A: "Bla-blah time yada-yada centuries" ... he says he can't recall what's in his book, while flashing the book cover yet again!
This guy is actually recruiting sycophants. He's a bottom-dealer. Simply that.
tremben 2 months ago
Comment removed
tremben 2 months ago
Gotta luv the way he flashes the book over and over while avoiding the question. I'm sure cranks and crack-pots are heartened by this outright fraud.
tremben 2 months ago
Go Mr Plima.Media noobs.
JOSEPHDANCE75 2 months ago
Manbiot Plimer
Come on, Manbiot: great that you're fighting the AGW-deniers, but drop the nuclear power.
Here's a word for you to learn: ENTROPY! Second Law of Thermo. The greater ORDER you create (to grow a human, grow a cow, build a nuclear plant) comes at the expense of greater DISORDER elsewhere. The only order-creating process on the planet is photosynthesis. Your nuclear plants that you love create disorder (i.e. unusuable non-work energy) faster than plants create order.
mphello 2 months ago
@mphello
you need to study the first, second and third laws of thermodynamics and have them explained to you. Your misunderstanding of basic physical principles is frightening.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz Well, certainly NOT by you. You know absolutely nothing about them. I doubt you're a vegan, like me. For instance, if you understood that growing more complex beings (cows, pigs, etc) to eat costs far more energy and wastes more cropland than eating the crops directly is a result of the 2nd Law, then you'd be vegan. A very practical application of it.
And, yes, Helen Caldicott DOES need to be more self-critical about medical effects of radiation. However, she's still
mphello 1 month ago
@mphello
If you would know anything about human metabolism, you would realize a small amount of meat is useful, especially to young and growing individuals as it helps them during puberty to supply energy and protein. The fact in the western world too much meat is consumed is a non-related matter.
Caldicott knows less about radiation and its effects on the human body than I do - and that's astounding because I'm a physics major, not a MD. For example she does not mention biological half-life.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz I never claim that small amounts of meat are harmful to humans. I disagree with many overstated health claims of health-vegans. But, that doesn't change the fact that any amount of meat is still GREAT harm to the animals, unless you've figured out a way to extract 1 hamburger painlessly from a cow while leaving the rest of the cow intact.
mphello 1 month ago
@mphello
Those animals are raised for food - if they were not raised for food, then they would not even exist, because we would exterminate anything on the fields. Not to mention a proper balanced agriculture using a symbiosis of animals, fields and recycling dung as fertilizer (which is not used today, unfortunately) is much closer to the natural balance than what you propose (not having animals due to ethical concerns).
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz
=Those animals are raised for food - if they were not raised for food, then they would not even exist=
Exactly. You're catching on. Exactly why meat needs to be outlawed.
mphello 1 month ago
@mphello
? So you advocate not raising livestock and raising crops only, which results in extremely unbalanced monocultures extremely succeptible to pest attacks and disease?
A combined holistic approach where animals are raised on farms that grow crops and are used as natural source of fertilizer (and the dung can be used to create methane for cogen and power)
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz right overall about idiotically moronic it is to build these massively complex nuclear systems that require round the clock babysitting and monitoring.
Let alone the waste.
I visited a small windmill utility (5 huge windmills) on a tour. ONE guy was needed to maintain it.
You don't know shit about basic physics or how the world works.
mphello 1 month ago
@mphello
You are an idiot. 5 windmills x 1.3 Megawatts each and comparing that to a 2Gw reactors - you would need 2000 windmills running at 100% capacity factor to replace one large nuke. A well run nuke can require a crew of 100 and has a higher contribution to the stability and power of a grid than 4 thousand windmills > because the average capacity factor of windmills is around 30%, while it is near 95% for modern reactors. That would mean 800 people for the windmills to replace on reactor.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
High school biology describes her plants consume all the available carbon dioxide from the air to form new life on earth. Carbon dioxide has been static in the air for last two centuries. Only idiots don't understand this.
JonThm 3 months ago
@JonThm "plants consume all the available carbon dioxide from the air"?! Plimer must have taught you biology. That's not just wrong: it's obviously insane.
You feel comfortable stating insane statements like that? Frightening.
tremben 2 months ago
I love they Prof Pilmer throws up the great cause of money to defend his denalist position. I'm sure the oil industry executives havn't money in mind when funding the denialist campaign.
MrPincoNico 3 months ago
Monbiot is a nuclear PR robot who is as full of shit as any other lobbyist asshole I've met. Why not interview someone who is not a totally bought slave-bitch to industry? Please... next show...
waterspindle 3 months ago
1/ It's funny how all the mendacious maggots come from the denialist side: Plimer, Monkton, Carter...all repeating their unsubstantiated crap ( Earth hasn't warmed since 1998, volcanoes emit more CO2 etc.). And how can we blame our super astute denialista for not checking whether those facts even have a whiff of credibility. After all, they did uncover that fiendish, socialist IPCC plot to starve our plants of much needed CO2
jh190959 4 months ago
2/ and ruin our economy, and in the process turning us into bicycle riding, sardine-eating beggars. I mean, rooting out those liberal conspiracies is hard work: there's no time for checking facts. Imagine all our beautiful trees gasping for CO2 ; imagine when they're all dead; imagine a house full of cast-iron and plastic furniture! _ what a horrible thought.
jh190959 4 months ago
If anyone is interested in a thorough debunking of Plimer, google "Ian Enting, Plimer". And a bag of doughnuts for deniers putting their hands up, in recognition of how far out of your comfort zone you would be putting yourself. Only kidding; don't email me asking for your doughnuts. Do it out of intellectual curiosity; treat your brain cells to a new sensation. I just hope the shock doesn't kill them all, hahaha...
jh190959 4 months ago
Comment removed
jh190959 4 months ago
Comment removed
jh190959 4 months ago
I have no doubt that global warming, but it can't be stop.
Increase human population = more global warming.
ScotteDio 4 months ago
Carbon dioxide there has been static for two centuries
JonThm 4 months ago
@JonThm Where do you have the evidence for this?
MrPincoNico 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrPincoNico High school biology describes her plants consume all the available carbon dioxide from the air to form new life on earth. Carbon dioxide has been static in the air for last two centuries. Only idiots don't understand this
JonThm 3 months ago
ppl know wat they have to do and ppl see with there own eye's wat's going on and wen it all come's down to it there no amount ov money tht can cover the bill so yes i agree we are fucked..................
URKRAZYCARRIE 4 months ago
both points are right, we are fucking up the climate, but all our 'leaders' care about is turning a good crisis into a profit, so the movement latches onto certain evidence and grows, in protest of the governments taxing approach to the situation. we're fucked either way, just rebel, rebel quietly, but always be rebelling.
soulcase1 4 months ago
Plimer is an extremely good sophist.
pl3bian 4 months ago
Why is everything about tax and money for conservatives or should I say right wingers?
birhan2006 4 months ago
Actual relevant scientists will want to talk about the Sun/Solar Radiation and it's effect on the earths climate, temperature etc.
4 building blocks for all life on earth - Sun, H2O, CO2, O2. One is now taxable?
appbadder 4 months ago
Almost nobody thinks that global warming is an organised conspiracy. People think that the scientists are geniune but are wrong. They have been given financial incentives to find evidence of global warming because previously being green was seen to be a vote winner. As climatology is not a hard science they will find whatever they are looking for. Businesses and government don't care whether the theories are right or wrong and only want to make money / taxes out of them.
Ermintrude75 4 months ago
Old Ian could not have plugged his book any more times or held it up for the camera more could he?
Easy to see Ian's motivation.
The $
TheJapanChannelDcom 4 months ago
Ian talks about the "height of bad manners" and yet he insults people freely like a very rude *sshole.
What a d*ck.
TheJapanChannelDcom 4 months ago
Not only does the ludicrous claim that a sapient species of earth could actually produce more Co2 than the largest natural pumps of fossils -volcanoes- is a slap in the face to industry and it throws out the scientific method's objectivity (science's ten commandments) for far-left subjective babbling. Our planet isn't a liberal... lol. It went through several extinction cycles, ice ages and warming. And it's still going strong - bright blue skies.
quidnick 4 months ago
@quidnick , i find it actually quite possible, that 150-170 years of industrial development, exponentially rising populations, cutting down of natural CO2 filters (rain forests) can polute more that volcanoes. it sounds pretty dumb to think that what we do in the world effects nothing. Volcanoes only errupt for maybe a couple days at most, as you know, power plants don't shut down, they keep pumping gases into the air. ur right that Ice ages and warming cycles do happen, not at this speed tho
Snobord381 4 months ago
I don't care about the politics of climate change, and seeing as how the individual's say doesn't matter in the eyes of these crooks... why should I? Why should the general public? There are more important things to attend to (like a debt crisis to start off.)
quidnick 4 months ago
Go George Go! Complete ownage
opmindcrime 4 months ago 2
Oof, dats gotta hurt :D pwnd!
purplegem23 4 months ago
George Monbiot's head should roll for letting off all that de-humanizing hate-propaganda and those blatant lies!
87solarsky 4 months ago
Deniers will never run out of ways to miss the point. Otherwise, they'd have to engage with the issues, and that's much too scary.
KapStuf 4 months ago 2
Plimer is correct: Follow the money. If, and it's still a Big IF, man made global warming is affecting the due course of climate change, all the dough in the world can't & won't reverse the natural course of change that we call climate. All global warming shills should find another environmental crisis, one that's susceptible to human intervention & improvement. These are the same capitalists that saw an imminent threat in the 70's with global cooling. Same bunch, same game. Wise up people!
BrotherWoody1 4 months ago
Even if humanity has an impact, and it probably does to some degree, the system of carbon taxing and offsets in no way solves the problem; it just enriches the 1% and Al Gore.
asymthought 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Organized Crime in Charge of EU Carbon Trade, Europol Says"
/watch?v=oL-e33oaI94&feature=channel_video_title
CRAPCANNONS 4 months ago
Who pays Plimer?
brucepig 4 months ago
@brucepig have a guess. He's director of three mining companies, chairman of a fourth, and good mates with Gina Rhinehart, Australias richest miner.
shakypam 2 months ago 2
Great interview!
lights21002003 4 months ago
calling critics "deniers" is a typical leftist tactic of namecalling. its called "repressive tolerance".
don't forget that al gore and his buddies got a economic interest in pushing the so called carbon trade. its a whole new way of ripping people off and making a load of money in the process
happosai27 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@happosai27
"Organized Crime in Charge of EU Carbon Trade, Europol Says"
/watch?v=oL-e33oaI94&feature=channel_video_title
CRAPCANNONS 4 months ago
@happosai27 It's nothing to do with "the left", Al Gore, or semantics. It's about with the survival of civilization as we know it. The worldwide scientific community is overwhelmingly sure that this is happening. It's complex, but it's beyond doubt. The scientists are already using the scientific method, they are already the "critics". People who deny the facts here are no better than creationists, and even more reprehensible.
murkartik 4 months ago
First KOS OMAK
Thejadjadjad 4 months ago
@Thejadjadjad
lol...don't think most will understand what it means, and who you mean it at would be nice to know too :-P
52111centrumcz 1 month ago