Hello Bob,
oh, so you do say that he "provided an updated assessment" (your words
below) - I'm getting a bit confused why you then attacked Bill O'Neill
for saying that "his comments were revised" - doesn't that say
essentially the same thing?
Of course it is easy to say with hindsight that somebody got it right,
but I still can't quite see how one could be so certain at that time who
is correct, when there were many different conflicting pieces of
information. And I don't quite see why one shouldn't also assume that
all players have some biasses in what they say, so that one should
evaluate all claims critically.
It seems to me that risk perception is a more complicated issue (a good
starting point is Tversky&Kahnemann, if you are interested), as is
adaptation. Besides the actual risk, as evaluated afterwards, one also
has to remember that these are judgments under uncertainty and therefore
one also has to consider the effects of being wrong in your judgement.
In evolution it has been a good strategy for survival to err on the side
of caution, and that's what our perception is tuned into - again I can
recommend some relevant literature, if you would like to read more.
Thanks
Stephan
Am 21.03.2011 18:42, schrieb Robert Ward:
> Stephan, thanks for flagging up this very interesting report from the
> Whitehall Editor of 'The Independent', which is based on a briefing from
> an anonymous minister
>
> I guess some on this list will consider this newspaper report to be far
> more reliable than the actual comments of the chief scientific adviser,
> who is clearly only interested in downplaying the risks to look after
> the interests of the nuclear industry, rather than offering an
> independent analysis based on the best evidence about the risk to public
> health!
>
> Still there may be others on this list who may wish to compare the
> newspaper report based on the anonymous minister's comments with the
> actual comments by John Beddington:
> http://ukinjapan.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=569052582
>
> He said: "When we last spoke, concerns were focused around the potential
> for a meltdown in the reactors. All the analysis we had and nobody is
> disagreeing with this, was that the Japanese response to this issue was
> entirely proportionate. Even with the most unfavourable weather
> conditions, there were no concerns that radioactivity would reach Tokyo,
> in any amount to cause a serious health risk.
>
> "Since then, the situation has changed. The information we got
> relatively early on this week was that the ponds, which hold spent fuel
> rods, had been allowed to dry out, in particular the pond at reactor
> number four. Now the problem with this is these ponds contain spent
> fuel rods and those rods are still highly radioactive. The worry that
> we had is that radiation could start coming out of these ponds, either
> through fires or minor explosions, generated by hydrogen gas being
> produced through reactions. And this would mean rather more radiation
> would be getting into the atmosphere than would have been the case with
> the reactors alone. So the ponds represent a really big change in the
> situation."
>
> He then provided an updated assessment of the worst case scenario: "In
> terms of Tokyo, we were asked by the PM to look at what we would do if
> there was to be a really worst case scenario at the plant, coupled with
> very unfavourable weather conditions. And even in that worst case
> scenario, and I would emphasise that this is an extremely unlikely case,
> even if that happened the level of radiation around Tokyo would be
> extremely modest. Although there would be radiation increases, even in
> this extreme case, the effect on human health could be substantially
> mitigated by just taking very simple precautions. By essentially
> staying indoors whilst the plume of radiation passed over, not having
> your ventilation on, and keeping your windows closed. These measures
> would mitigate any significant risks to human health."
>
> So, not quite "Senior ministers were "misinformed" about the risks of a
> nuclear meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant by the Government's
> chief scientific advisor" as The Independent claimed. Still, no need to
> let the facts get in the way of a good scare story!
>
> Bob Ward
>
> Policy and Communications Director
> Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
> London School of Economics and Political Science
> Houghton Street
> London WC2A 2AE
>
> http://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham
>
> Tel. +44 (0) 20 7106 1236
> Mob. +44 (0) 7811 320346
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephan Matthiesen
> Sent: 21 March 2011 17:24
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] British journalists spiralling out of control -
> hysteria sweeps across newsrooms
>
> Bob,
>
> can you comment on this newspaper report?
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-ministers-spooked-
> by-chief-scientific-advisor-2245413.html
>
> Quote:
> Senior ministers were "misinformed" about the risks of a nuclear
> meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant by the Government's chief
> scientific advisor, The Independent has learnt.
>
> At a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday ministers were briefed on the
> "worst-case scenario" by Sir John Beddington. But less than 24 hours
> later the situation had deteriorated beyond even the most pessimistic
> private forecasts by Sir John. As a consequence, there was a significant
>
> delay in advising British residents to leave Tokyo and the surrounding
> area. (end quote)
>
> Thank you
> Stephan
>
> Am 21.03.2011 09:33, schrieb Robert Ward:
>> Bill, within your insulting attack on the integrity of Sir John
>> Beddington is your claim that his comments "were revised as the crisis
>> escalated and came more in line with what many others were reporting."
>>
>> Where is your evidence to support this claim?
>>
>> I gave a link to his comments on 15 March, in which he pointed out
> that
>> the Chernobyl reactor was very different in design to those at the
>> Fukushima plant, so assessments of the risks needed to take that into
>> account.
>>
>> So why don't you stop regurgitating anti-nuclear rhetoric and simply
>> provide some evidence to justify your amazing claims?
>>
>> Bob Ward
>>
>> Policy and Communications Director
>> Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
>> London School of Economics and Political Science
>> Houghton Street
>> London WC2A 2AE
>>
>> http://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham
>>
>> Tel. +44 (0) 20 7106 1236
>> Mob. +44 (0) 7811 320346
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bill O'Neill
>> Sent: 21 March 2011 06:10
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] British journalists spiralling out of control
> -
>> hysteria sweeps across newsrooms
>>
>> sadly, sorry to disappointment, but that ain't necessarily so -
> although
>> it is a handy distraction from the point i've
>> been trying to make, regarding vested interests...
>>
>> as i recall, beddington's comments (or the comments reported to him)
>> came late and contrasted in tenor with official
>> pronouncements from japan, the us and elsewhere, until they were
> revised
>> as the crisis escalated and came more in line
>> with what many others were reporting...
>>
>> this is evidence of caution, or optimism, or incompetence, or
>> impracticalities, or pressure, or something else, or a
>> mixture...i assumed pressure because, i guess, some experience of the
>> chernobyl aftermath had prepared me for the worst,
>> and because, i guess, i'd heard comments from a minister - "this won't
>> affect our decision on nuclear power - such
>> decisions are not taken over a matter of days"- and from an industry
>> chief - "this doesn't mean there's a problem with
>> nuclear power - the accident will improve reactor/station designs" -
>> (all paraphased)...my assumption wasn't an attack
>> on beddington, just simply reflecting the way the world works...
>>
>> in the end, the messenger brings the message and the message brings
> the
>> vested interest... and chopping the head off the
>> messenger still leaves a message with a vested interest. amen
>>
>>
>>
>> ============================================
>> Original Message
>>
>> Bill, many thanks for confirming that your comments are not based on
> any
>> evidence!
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 20 Mar 2011, at 15:27, "Bill O'Neill"<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> apologies, only just picked up on this...
>>>
>>> my reference to beddington (chosen only because he was the source in
>> the original contribution) was made in the context
>>> of what i was proposing re: messenger/message - that his comments
>> should be assessed, in my view, in the context of who
>>> he is, who his paymasters/advisers are, his audience and so on...i
> was
>> not judging his honesty or knowledge, nor that of
>>> his paymasters/advisers (how could i?) but, if you like, i was taking
>> vested interests into account...equally, being
>>> chief scientist doesn't make him the pope (infallible), or not in my
>> view...
>>>
>>> i might add that i did find it slightly irksome that beddington's
>> comments, which matched what the original contributor
>>> wanted to hear, were held up as exemplary while those of others,
> which
>> didn't, were dismissed as hysteria, but that's
>>> another issue...
>>>
>>> journalists (and scientists) are making such assessments every
>> day...gauging one piece of evidence against another,
>>> establishing extremes, then honing in on the truth (with any
>> luck)...it's a long, tricky process, especially as
>>> political, economic and social forces conspire to try to get their
> own
>> way...and deadlines don't help...
>>>
>>> to suggest that my comment on beddington amounts to a "slur" is daft
> -
>> and a typically extravagant response from a
>>> lobbyist with one agenda, and with one worldview...
>>>
>>> ============================================
>>> Original Message
>>>
>>> Wasn't the suggestion preceded by the words 'I assumed'? In other
>> words, just a personal opinion albeit not
>> complimentary.
>>>
>>> Carolyn
>>>
>>> On 18 Mar 2011, at 10:50, Francis Sedgemore wrote:
>>>
>>>> Questioning whether Beddington is giving his own, honest opinion, or
>> that of the state he serves, is perfectly
>>> legitimate. The evidence in my view points firmly to the former. We
>> should be focusing on the content of the discussion,
>>> and provocative interventions can help to do just that.
>>>>
>>>> Francis
>>>>
>>>> On 18/03/2011 10:39, Robert Ward wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the suggestion that the CSA's comments were the result of
>> having
>>>>> been "leant on" is a pretty offensive personal smear, particularly
>> as it
>>>>> is not supported by any evidence whatsoever. Perhaps the psci-com
>> list
>>>>> owner could take a views on whether the message is in breach of the
>>>>> list's rules?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob Ward
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dr Francis Sedgemore
>>>> journalist and science writer
>>>> www.sedgemore.com
>>>>
>> **********************************************************************
>> Further information about the psci-com
>>> discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web
>> site:
>>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html You may also change
> your
>> settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to psci-com
>>> from the web site.
>>>> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service,
> known
>> as 'JISCMail'. It adheres to the JISCMail
>>> Acceptible Use Policy:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html and to
>> the JISCMail guidelines for
>>> etiquette: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>>>>
>>>> Email commands: 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on
>> leave, for example, send an email to
>>> mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
>>>>
>>>> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>>>>
>>>> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
>> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>>>>
>>>> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>>>>
>>>> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
>> the message:
>>>>
>>>> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>>>>
>>>> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate. Remember
>> that you will need to send commands using the
>>> same email address that you used to register on psci-com. To contact
>> the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to:
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>
>>>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>>>
>>>
>>> Carolyn Allen
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> **********************************************************************
>>> Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including
> list
>> archive, can be found at the list web site:
>>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
>>> You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to
>> psci-com from the web site.
>>>
>>> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known
>> as 'JISCMail'.
>>> It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptible Use Policy:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
>>> and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>>>
>>> Email commands:
>>> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
>>> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following
>> message:
>>>
>>> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>>>
>>> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
>> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>>>
>>> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>>>
>>> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
>> the message:
>>>
>>> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>>>
>>> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
>>> Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email
>> address that you used to register on psci-com.
>>> To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to:
>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
> **********************************************************************
>>>
>>>
> **********************************************************************
>>> Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including
> list
>> archive, can be found at the list web site:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
>>> You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to
>> psci-com from the web site.
>>>
>>> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known
>> as 'JISCMail'.
>>> It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptible Use Policy:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
>>> and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>>>
>>> Email commands:
>>> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
>>> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following
>> message:
>>>
>>> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>>>
>>> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
>> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>>>
>>> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>>>
>>> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
>> the message:
>>>
>>> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>>>
>>> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
>>> Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email
>> address that you used to register on psci-com.
>>> To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to:
>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
> **********************************************************************
>>
>> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic
>> communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>> Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list
>> archive, can be found at the list web site:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
>> You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to
> psci-com
>> from the web site.
>>
>> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known
> as
>> 'JISCMail'.
>> It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptible Use Policy:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
>> and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>>
>> Email commands:
>> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
>> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following
>> message:
>>
>> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
>> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>>
>> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
> the
>> message:
>>
>> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
>> Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email
>> address that you used to register on psci-com.
>> To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to:
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>> Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list
>> archive, can be found at the list web site:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
>> You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to
> psci-com
>> from the web site.
>>
>> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known
> as
>> 'JISCMail'.
>> It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptible Use Policy:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
>> and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette:
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>>
>> Email commands:
>> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
>> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following
>> message:
>>
>> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
>> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>>
>> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
> the
>> message:
>>
>> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
>> Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email
>> address that you used to register on psci-com.
>> To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to:
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>
>> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic
> communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>> Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list
> archive, can be found at the list web site:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
>> You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to
> psci-com from the web site.
>>
>> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known
> as 'JISCMail'.
>> It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptible Use Policy:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
>> and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>>
>> Email commands:
>> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
>> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following
> message:
>>
>> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>>
>> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
> the message:
>>
>> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>>
>> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
>> Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email
> address that you used to register on psci-com.
>> To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to:
> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>
--
Stephan Matthiesen
http://www.stephan-matthiesen.de
Neu auf www.science-texts.de: Sarrazin - das fehlende Kapitel
**********************************************************************
Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to psci-com from the web site.
Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known as 'JISCMail'.
It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptible Use Policy: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
Email commands:
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email address that you used to register on psci-com.
To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to: [log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
|