Smoking guns and being late to the party

As long-time readers of this blog probably know well, I like to do my own analysis of things.  This is partially because I think things should be checked and re-checked to make sure the original work is correct (one of the standard methods of science), but also because I don't spend huge amounts of time digging into what other people have done before I go and crunch numbers myself.

Yes, I know.  A couple of months in the laboratory can save you a few hours in the library, etc. etc. ad nauseam.  But the math and lab time has the virtue of being a learning experience.

Given this difference in emphasis, I suppose it's not too surprising that everything I wrote about the murder of the IFR was actually quite old news to readers of Steve Kirsch and a fellow named Tom Blees wrote a whole book about it.  I only found this out after I did a search for something which brought up Kirsch's blog, and what a trove it is!

One of the more remarkable finds is proof that the IFR's demise was murder for the exact reason I speculated.

Q. How about the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)?

Dave Lochbaum, Director of the Nuclear Safety Project, UCS has been in the nuclear industry for nearly 30 years. He wrote:

Overall, I am not persuaded by the arguments that the IFR will play or should play a key role in our or the world's energy future. The IFR looks good on paper. So good, in fact, that we should leave it on paper.

We had method and opportunity.  This states the motive in clear terms.  The crime of murder is proven.

  ¶ 12/28/2010 06:45:00 PM