Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Another]

If we are still at it - here is a highly informative poster about radiation: http://xkcd.com/radiation/
I think that everyone who ever open his mouth (or reach for keyboard) to express his opinion about radiation should first check the facts listed there.

[Alastar]

Yes, their wording was sloppy... I assume intentionally so, because there wouldn't be a dramatic headline otherwise (neither is a major concern). But it illustrates that there are exaggerated fears about radiation.

Weighing total hazards is difficult, but reputable assessments seem to agree that health issues stemming from normal operation of nuclear plants pale compared to health issues assocciated with most other power sources.
Waste is compact enough that containment (until reuse where practical) isn't a major technical or economic problem.
What it mostly comes down to is "do we trust regulating bodies to enforce responsible use?".

[Descan]

Considering that we allow(ed?) coal plants to spew radioactive ash into the air, you tell me. :V

[10ebbor10]

Considering that we allow(ed?) coal plants to spew radioactive ash into the air, you tell me. :V

Because nobody knows. Thanks to the global panic around it, nuclear is heavily regulated. To the point that most plants spend twice as much on security as on fuel.

[Descan]

Then what about the nitrogen problem? Death-zones in the Gulf of Mexico and all. We know it's a problem. We know it's a huge problem. Buuut last I heard, there weren't any regulations on it. Or at least, the regulations we have aren't enough, because it's still there. :I

[10ebbor10]

Nah, hardly anyone knows about it. If you ask somebody on the street about nuclear energy, they'll be able to tell you of it's uber-deadliness, whether that's accurate or not.

If you ask them about the dangers of nitrogen, there's a not insignificant chance that they'll start talking about streetracing.

[Owlbread]

A Catholic High School in Lancashire has barred two pupils from the classrooms because they had full beards. The two pupils were Muslim, aged 14. They refused to shave their beards, and have since been barred from all their classes for their defiance. The headmaster is insisting it isn't a "religious issue", claiming that it was all down to dress code stuff. I'm sure that'll go down a treat.

To be honest I wish I could have grown a beard worth the name when I was 14, I just had sideburns and a wispy moustache (some things never change). Our schools never really got into that kind of control though, they were just very restrictive over what kind of trousers we could wear and so forth (i.e. no jeans, not even black ones).

[da_nang]

I never get the fanaticism over school dress codes. As long as they at least wear some clothing, what's the problem? Let them dress however they want.

[Max White]

Catholic schools are all about raising 'model catholic citizens' that look, at and dress a certain way to promote a certain image. They like well pressed, well trimmed and to a certain extent well mannered. It is all very strict. I went to one for two years and did notice that they seem more focused on trying to promote a certain personality, rather than granting the tools of education. Not that they didn't do a good job teaching, they had good teachers that did their best, but it was the principle and deputy and local clergy that seemed to care more about how well tied your tie was than anything else.

[Sheb]

Aren't those private school? I mean, if they are, shouldn't they be free to impose whatever clothing code they want?

[Max White]

Depends what you call 'private', I know in many places they receive a lot of government funding.

[Sheb]

Yeah, that's what I was asking, especially since in the UK "public school" are actually private.

[Owlbread]

The elephant in the room here is that two Muslim pupils attending a Catholic school grew beards for religious reasons and were forced to either shave them off or not go to classes. Can you imagine if they did that to Sikh pupils? Catholic schools in the UK are also mostly state funded, I don't know if that particular one was but it seems to be.

They're also forced to sit and study in another class and not mix with anybody, effectively in "isolation".

It doesn't exactly present a good message to kids if they're encouraged to be ashamed of their own facial hair, like an erection or a period or something.

[Sheb]

Going to play Devil's advocate, but I don't see why a catholic school should accommodate Muslim pupils. (The converse would be true. I can imagine a muslim school forcing female student to wear the veil.)

I also don't see why a catholic school should get state funding, but yeah.

[Owlbread]

The trouble is that in the UK we try to be "tolerant" of religion, but at the same time try to force them to conform to the basic modern politically-correct attitudes and standards. Examples include trying to force gay marriage in Churches where some people genuinely believe homosexuals are suffering from some kind of Satanic affliction.

Indeed, many make that same point here, Sheb. In Scotland if we didn't have a referendum going on right now, the Catholic schools thing would probably be our hottest political issue besides... childcare or something.