I note with interest that the TOD thread Charles Barton participated in as a keynote poster is thick with personal attacks against him.
I suppose this is understandable. You couldn't really get very far attacking the concepts.
Sir,
I don't think you're a crackpot. I think you're a Cold Warrior hero.
I'll just leave it there.
I dropped a comment in over there as much to criticize the lack of journalistic integrity as the insult they offered you. To dismiss someone as a crackpot without at the very least doing a minimum of research and calling your comment critical of Moore is unacceptable sloppiness at the very least.
Let's see if they put it up.
Atomic Rod,
That was a good letter, and that was definitely an ad hominem attack against you in calling you a 'crackpot'.
Keep fighting the good fight.
Jay
Well, Rod, I'll just say this: All of this would be a lot simpler if Greenpeace, NIRS, etc., were completely transparent about where their money comes from.
Where does NIRS get its money? I have lost the source, but somewhere they claim a certain percent of their funding comes from donations from the public. It was far less than 100%. Who is providing the rest?
We don't know, because they won't tell.
On the other side of the coin, we know who funds the NEI.
Well, Commander Crackpot, Shrill Propagandist Extraordinaire, I didn't leave it there.
I tried argument from authority, as I know how well you know nuclear power. Not posted publicly yet (none are).
Hi Rod.
Well, I'm at least glad people take the time to read and write. I'll be posting this later tonight once I get a chance to think more, and I've approved the few comments I've seen but hadn't gotten to because well...it's Saturday and I'm tired.
Did I call you a crackpot? No. The title of the post purposely had the tongue-in-cheek term (which I've been called on a regular basis from a few angles) in parentheses, because I wasn't really sure how to interpret your letter, especially the first part. I'll actually post and respond to your riff on Luddism, etc, when I have a chance tonight. Just a few things:
At the time of your letter, I had no way of verifying your credentials or background. The Google Cache of your "whooiz" profile (since the site itself is broken) is actually why I'm taking the time to write. I've got some friends who have just passed Nuke school, and anyone who can get through that has my respect, despite the fact that I respect anyone who takes the time to write me with feedback, or read. How I interpret that feedback and choose to act on it is a different story.
I understand that you have experience with reactors from your time in the Silent Service. If you can wear your Dolphins, you at least know how a reactor operates, etc. I'll be noting that.
While I do not doubt your hands-on experience with reactors and Nuclear power while serving on two Boomers (which you could have mentioned in your original message, or in an easier to find place since you write on Nuclear issues) I still have to take issue (as I did before) with much of your letter. I will have something up on my own site shortly, since I don't want to clog your comments any further.
I respect your service (I certainly could not pass Nuke school, and I hold my friends who attended your alma mater with an esteem short of total awe), but I do believe we have a legitimate difference of opinion, and that your commendable zeal and advocacy for Nuclear power may have led you to find "elephants in mouseholes." Both the industry and the various movements on both sides have made glaring mistakes.
My focus, however, is to look forward, and perhaps it would be good if we could continue this conversation and possibly use it to give advice to other emerging technologies and entrepreneurs.
I hope that we can continue this conversation. Feel free to contact me. I'm also about 35 minutes away.
Best,
Andrew
Andrew:
Thank you for your response. I would certainly like to continue the conversation - how would you like to be a guest on The Atomic Show Podcast?
We can do it over the phone or at a local coffee shop like the one where you talked with Dr. Moore.
I also like people who read and write. As a matter of fact here is my personal Rickover interview story.
Admiral Rickover personally interviewed every officer candidate for his program from the inception of the program in the early 1950s until he was retired by John Lehman (then Secretary of the Navy) in 1982. I was in the USNA class of 1981, so I had the opportunity for one of those famous personal encounters.
After making it through all of the preliminary interviews with the NR staff, I was ushered into the Admiral's office by a Navy captain who took a seat near the office door. I sat in front of Admiral Rickover while he looked over my record.
He looked up and me and said "Humf. English major. Why were you an English major?"
I answered "Well sir, I like to read and write."
Rickover - "Write? Have you ever written any books? I have written three books. Have you read any of them?"
I answered "Not yet, sir." (I have one of those books in my library now. It is a perceptive analysis of what should be done to improve the American education system.)
Rickover "What do you think of that Captain? English major."
Captain near the door "Well sir, I was an English major for my first two years in college."
Rickover "That's all."
Judging from the fact that he accepted me into his program, I guess that my grades in science, math and engineering courses - along with my performance in the staff interviews - were good enough for the Admiral.
Mr. Feinberg did not call you a crackpot. But you know how those Navy nicknames go: They aren't always justified, but sometimes they just stick.
Cool story about Admiral Rickover. I heard you tell it in one of your 'casts.
Great story about Rickover.
FYI, my response is posted here.
http://www.capitolvalley.net/200...iners-
nucl.html
I hope you'll excuse the snaky title and that we can talk soon. I'd love to come on your show. Just shoot me an email.
Sir,
This is even better than the GreenOptions debate (and that was swell). I can kind of 'razor' Mr. Feinberg's likening of the current power system (multiple meanings) to the sloth-like movement of IBM and DEC in response to, say, Microsoft and Compaq. But I think there are orders of magnitude more money and control at stake in energy.
I don't think I'm old enough to be a "Mr." but thanks 
Commenting by HaloScan
