[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Nuke decay, Climate change [was: A Republican!!!!!! (was Re: OT: sponge burning!)]

Wulfy wrote:
As for the quote above, yes, they won't see [the effects of nuclear waste being buried in a mountain].. unless they start mining, or there's an earthquake or erosion... no-one can guarantee that that won't happen. Especially with the climate changes that are happening.

Just as an aside, I read a blurb yesterday somewhere that some 'nukeler fizzist' or some-such has found a way to actually change the rate of nuclear decay, such that the threat from nuclear waste could be reduced from 10K years or so to 2 years or so. That'd be great if it's true.

Of course, the entire physics community is dissin' him, because everyone _knows_ that nuclear decay is an unchangeable constant.

I might add, I understand this guy is not a Young-Earth Creationist, but YEC's point to him as a mainstream physicist who has independently corroborated their findings in the RATE Project (see Google, I'd think) in which they claim to have found direct evidence for changes in the nuclear decay rates in the past (which has relevance to radioactive dating techniques which is relevant to the age-of-the-earth issues). I don't know one way or the other, but I do know that "entrenched science" is extremely resistant to mavericks, even when they're right. (This last statement can also be applied to the "climate changes that are happening" statement in Wulfy's quote -- doesn't matter if it's happening or not; if you challenge the idea you tend to lose funding or get fired or get raked over the coals, etc.)

Kent West
http://kentwest.blogspot.com <http://kentwest.blogspot.com/>

Reply to: