>
> On Feb 28, 2008, at 4:21 PM, sergio masci wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, wouter van ooijen wrote:
>
>>> We wouldn't. The point is that the above example shows that
>>> for the given conditions that natural reactor was exposed to
>>> the granite, sandstone and clays do a good job at keeping the
>>> plutonium and other wastes in place. You can then use that
>>> knowledge, and other geological knowledge, to make sure that
>>> a proposed dump will be exposed to similar conditions.
>>
>> I disagree. You are confusing correlation with cause-and-effect.  
>> Without
>> much much more proof (much more than 1 non-random sample) I do not  
>> trust
>> anyone to correctly identify the factors that made this site  
>> stable. Not
>> for anything as important as dumping spent fuel.
>
> I've said it before and I'll say it again: it will always come down to
> trust. You can chase these arguments round and round but ultimately it
> always boils down to the same thing.
>
> Regards
> Sergio

So, Sergio , expand on this trust thing ...... Who do you trust ?  Do  
you vote ?  Do you drive ?  Do you trust yourself ?  I myself trust  
everyone as far as I can throw them.  And I want electricity and  
electronic toys and vacations and restaurants and medical care and I  
want to drive on the highway.  Do I trust utilities  and Apple and  
Greeks and AppleBees and my doctor and other drivers ?  Not really, I  
just have to fake it since I want all those things.  So what has  
trust have to do with it ?
cc
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist