Nuclear Fallout Kills 370 Times Fewer People Than Coal

A NUCLEAR REACTOR MELTDOWN IS MANKIND’S WORST SCI-FI NIGHTMARE, AND NASA SAYS IT’S NOT NEARLY AS LETHAL AS THE COAL WE BURN EVERY DAY.

0 Comments

inShare

If you’ve seen the most recent photos from Fukushima, the prefecture containing Japan’s devastated nuclear plant, you’ll get a taste of how bad things are. It’s a radioactive ghost town. And what you don’t see in the dusty-surreal Google Street View is the heroics of the plant engineers who stayed long past safe radioactive limits were breached to best contain the disaster.

The thoughts make my stomach clench, but that guttural response to nuclear disaster is a bit naive in the grand scheme of things. Because according to new research by NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, while nuclear meltdowns are horrifying, coal pollution is a far worse (silent) killer. Some 1.84 million more people would be dead without the last 38 years of nuclear power. From Co.Exist:

[NASA’s] Pushker Kharecha and James Hansen estimate that 4,900 people died as a result of nuclear power between 1971 and 2009, mostly from workplace accidents and radiation fallout, but, they said, 370 times more people (1.84 million) would have died, had we generated the same power from fossil fuels. 

The scientists’ figures are based on estimates of mortality caused by particulate pollution, which killed 1.2 million people in China in 2010, according to a recent report. And it gets worse. They say burning natural gas to replace nuclear power will result in at least 420,000 deaths by 2050, and 7 million more if we replace it solely with coal.

Fukushima was a disaster, but these coal and natural gas figures are on the scale of war and mass genocide. We shouldn’t allow our nostalgia forMary Poppins and our fear of Dr. Strangelove cloud the mortal lessons that data can teach us.

Read the study here.

Are Brain Games Bunk?

SORRY--ALL THOSE NUMBER GAMES MIGHT NOT ACTUALLY IMPROVE YOUR INTELLIGENCE OVERALL.

0 Comments

inShare

Brain games, we’ve been told, are a lot like exercise. You do them because you care about yourself, and want to invest in your body, and bask in the self-righteous glow of a better working memory and higher IQ. But do they actually work?

A new meta-analysis of 23 different studies about memory training is spurring the scientific community to question the very basis of the idea that memory games improve reasoning in everyone, from ADHD sufferers to the elderly. In the New Yorker, Gareth Cook explains:

The meta-analysis found that the training isn’t doing anyone much good. If anything, the scientific literature tends to overstate effects, because teams that find nothing tend not to publish their papers. (This is known as the “filedrawer” effect.) A null result from meta-analysis, published in a top journal, sends a shudder through the spine of all but the truest of believers.

No biggie--that’s what the scientific process is for, right? The problem is, brain training has blossomed into a multimillion-dollar industry. Companies like CogMed are selling the idea that their games can improve the mental agility of customers, including those with learning disabilities. That’s a morally ambiguous business model:

The responsibility is so heavy because the needs are so great. Many people who have suffered brain trauma are haunted by a feeling of diminishment and a frustration that they can’t do more to help themselves. There are millions of children with learning disabilities who feel lost and ashamed. And then there are all the seniors who struggle with mental dissipation. These are the customers.

These new studies show that brain training does help you improve on certain skills, so there’s nothing wrong with playing brain games. Selling them as a miracle cure for damaged or disabled brains? That’s more problematic.

Read the whole article.

An NYC Penthouse With An 80-Foot Slide Inside

The American Tract Society Building is one of the oldest surviving skyscrapers in NYC. Tucked away inside is a four-story, 6,500-foot expanse with full panoramic views of the city. It had never been inhabited, until now.

David Hotson, along with Ghislaine Viñas, made over the space as a home that’s equal parts whimsical and austere. The original arched windows and many of the original steel beams stayed intact, but the verticality has been transformed with bold, playful features. Hotson has said that he wanted to “constantly exploit the fact that we’re sitting on top of a skyscraper in Manhattan.”

And while a glance at the dizzying array of beams hanging overhead demonstrates that idea, it’s a concept taken to new heights with an 80-foot slide that snakes straight into the living room, a clear bridge that appears to float in midair, and handholds that allow you to climb a central support beam like a rock wall. If you make it part way up, you can lounge in the “nest,” an intimate nook squeezed within the structure’s girders. From there you can keep climbing to an almost attic-style space.

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1672181/an-nyc-penthouse-with-an-80-foot-slide-inside#5

Burn Note: All messages self-destruct and are resistant to copying

https://burnnote.com/

Welcome to Burn Note, we make your online conversations more private.

Every message on Burn Note is automatically deleted using a timer when it is opened. Deleted Burn Notes are completely erased and can not be recovered. While being viewed, our the patent-pending Spotlight system makes message contents resistant to copying, capture via screenshots, and the glances of curious bystanders.

Burn Note is great for sensitive conversations. For example you might use Burn Note to ask a friend for advice on a business negotiation, to get the scoop from a coworker about a meeting you missed, or even just to let your girlfriend know that you miss her.