I like that the Fredrickburg Advance listed you as a humorist and directed people to your substack.
We get text Quake Alerts. Once I got one just a few seconds before the quake. It just got me all panicked a few seconds early. The next one came during the quake.
A nuclear event is different, I'm not sure just the texts are a good idea. Maybe it is just because I am caught between digital and old systems, I would still want the siren.
Nuclear events in the USA have been pretty much "meh" anyhow. The worst have all been military, and we found out how bad they were years after the fact.
Three mile island has the same background radiation level off the plant site that it had before the plant was built. But our "great" media has sure caused plenty of stress related disease in that area due to never mentioning anything but "in the worst case possible imaginary scenario made up by a Green desperate for publicity" as news.
And doubtless, people will start yelling at me instead of actually trying to check the facts. Which is OK, I'm used to it. The default is still to believe the media, no matter what garbage they "report" from someone who knows NOTHING about the subject. (Yes, I've studied physics, which included nuclear physics and light water reactors. I may be 50 years out of date, but I'm not stupid and my memory still functions.)
Want some fun, go read the WHO 2006 (IIRC) report on Chernobyl health effects across Western Europe. If you understand statistics, and population numbers, you realize after a few minutes that they're desperately trying to hide the fact that the actual numbers (which they do give) showed less than a one sigma change in cancer, which is a fancy way of saying "there was no detectable difference that could not be explained by random chance". But wow, the news sure didn't want to report it that way. OFC, when you've reported millions and millions as the predicted increase, it's a mite self shaming to say "less than could be just random chance".
It's kind of pathetic when our news starts depending on the ignorance of the news consumer.
Sigh. Guess that's my irritated math based rant for the day.
They can't do both?
I like that the Fredrickburg Advance listed you as a humorist and directed people to your substack.
We get text Quake Alerts. Once I got one just a few seconds before the quake. It just got me all panicked a few seconds early. The next one came during the quake.
A nuclear event is different, I'm not sure just the texts are a good idea. Maybe it is just because I am caught between digital and old systems, I would still want the siren.
It matters less how far away it is and it matters more whether the prevailing winds tend to blow over it, in your direction... 💣🤯☢️
Nuclear events in the USA have been pretty much "meh" anyhow. The worst have all been military, and we found out how bad they were years after the fact.
Three mile island has the same background radiation level off the plant site that it had before the plant was built. But our "great" media has sure caused plenty of stress related disease in that area due to never mentioning anything but "in the worst case possible imaginary scenario made up by a Green desperate for publicity" as news.
And doubtless, people will start yelling at me instead of actually trying to check the facts. Which is OK, I'm used to it. The default is still to believe the media, no matter what garbage they "report" from someone who knows NOTHING about the subject. (Yes, I've studied physics, which included nuclear physics and light water reactors. I may be 50 years out of date, but I'm not stupid and my memory still functions.)
Want some fun, go read the WHO 2006 (IIRC) report on Chernobyl health effects across Western Europe. If you understand statistics, and population numbers, you realize after a few minutes that they're desperately trying to hide the fact that the actual numbers (which they do give) showed less than a one sigma change in cancer, which is a fancy way of saying "there was no detectable difference that could not be explained by random chance". But wow, the news sure didn't want to report it that way. OFC, when you've reported millions and millions as the predicted increase, it's a mite self shaming to say "less than could be just random chance".
It's kind of pathetic when our news starts depending on the ignorance of the news consumer.
Sigh. Guess that's my irritated math based rant for the day.
“Anna's Calling
Let's have a meltdown”
When I saw this headline, but before I saw your Graphic Editorial, I thought that it was going to be about Anna Paulina Luna. 😉
➡️Here’s the link to my
➡️Pre-Election Signature:😉
⬇️
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/09/18/telnaes-cartoon-vance-creating-stories/?commentID=d0e5646c-be72-4634-8bcc-a6dda149b887
⬆️