This site requires a lot of work. We hope you find our efforts valuable and rewarding. Please consider offering your support. There is no minimum amount. Feel free to donate as you see fit, without restriction. Thank you...
THE HIROSHIMA SYNDROME
"It ain’t what you don’t know that counts. It’s what you know that ain’t so." (Will Rogers)
Did you know...
...Mother Nature uses nuclear energy exclusively.
...Uranium used in reactors cannot explode like a bomb.
...The Fukushima accident's radiation will not harm anyone.
...Bomb fallout is very different from nuclear power plant radiation releases.
...Low-level radiation is not dangerous, in fact it might be necessary to human health.
Although many people might find them counter-intuitive, all of the above statements are correct. Beginning with the nuclear explosion at Hiroshima in August, 1945, and due largely to necessary secrecy continuing through the end of the Cold War in 1989, numerous misunderstandings and misconceptions have become paradigms of public understanding with respect to nuclear power plants. These misunderstandings and misconceptions about nuclear power plants have resulted in a widespread psychological bias which may be termed the Hiroshima Syndrome. The above statements are but the tip of the iceberg. With the ominous threat of global warming now looming over us, we need to utilize the only large-scale form of electricity production which leaves no carbon footprint; nuclear energy. Before the nuclear power option can become one of the primary solutions to global warming, the numerous misconceptions which perpetuate the Hiroshima Syndrome must be exposed and corrected in the public mind.
In the aftermath of Three Mile Island’s meltdown accident in 1979, the terms “nuclear” and “environmentalist” became mutually exclusive in the mind of the American public. For the most part, they still are. As we will see in the course of this website, what’s appropriate for the environment must include the large scale production of electricity from the splitting of atoms. If what's most natural to the world around us is the most appropriate environmental option for electricity production, then nuclear becomes an environmentalist's central focus. "Nuclear" and "environmentalist" should be correctly understood to be mutually agreeable terms. Radical? Absolutely! A flight of fancy resulting from a warped use of facts? Absolutely not! The truth about nuclear energy is mostly not what has been believed by the public, news media, and much of the non-nuclear scientific community over the past six-plus decades. It’s time to set the record straight, and attempt to halt electricity's contribution to global warming, before it's too late. (For site topics, use the menu at the left)
(WHAT IS HAPPENING IN JAPAN? For access to the internet's top-rated source of ongoing information concerning the Fukushima Accident, click on "Fukushima Accident Updates" in the menu at the left of this page. Information about Fukushima is updated twice weekly. For fact-based opinions, click on "Fukushima Commentary".)
For a Greener Planet
"Thanks for writing the book -- it's quite the read" (Steve B.)
"Extremely well done and helpful" (Meredith A.)
"Thanks for devoting the time to produce this work. It's a very useful account" (Barry S.)
"This is a story which cannot be put down" (Will D.)