Nuclear Citizens' Jury: an ethical case for importing nuclear wastes
By Noel Wauchope

Max Green on P8 presented a Utopian view of a nuclear future if this, that and the other circumstances all operated optimally. On the same page I asked in a post dated 30th November some pertinent questions for clarification.

More than a week has passed and he has neither tried to respond positively, nor even acknowledged my post. I ask all Proponents of the nuclear waste dump; Why not try to answer to the best of one's ability? Max Green gave credible predictions which presupposed some detailed expertise. Why not provide answers to a declared skeptic? I asked questions as a layman, as a member of a concerned public and as an Australian. Is it impolite, bad form, ungentlemanly or uncouth to question expertise?

An excellent opportunity to present a legitimate case, to ease the doubts of a skeptic has been wasted. Ockham's Razor dictates that the Principal of Parsimony be applied and consequently further suspicions as to the honesty and integrity of the Proponents have emerged.

Shadow Minister writes: "Prejudices won as expected." And he is completely wrong. He's blaming the public and expects them to feel that somehow they've let the side down because they aren't meek enough to accept entrenched, partisan and self-interested platitudes from the experts.

A significant public antipathy toward the NWD proposal has been generated because a majority of citizens are no longer susceptible to the blandishments of half-truths, of pie-in-the-sky predictions of Utopia, of being kept ignorant of consequences that are apparent only to experts and of politicians who claim to be the exclusive repositories of revealed truth in all matters.

Weatherill will not be satisfied until he canvasses every household in the state. Maybe he's convinced God wants it. There's nothing so contemptible and fatally flawed as a messianic politician who's convinced he has a Royal Telephone. Draped in the cloak of arcane wisdom bestowed by electoral success and elevated by his peers to leadership, he treats with the Lord on a first-name basis and a handshake.

Hello Contemptible Troll,
Let me rephrase that for you:

"the people had their say and they didn't think much of the prejudiced view put forward by contemptible trolls".

Much better.

In case there's any confusion, accepting your apology doesn't lessen my personal contempt for you and those you purport to represent.

Do everyone a favour and jump off a tall building before you do any more harm.

Nuclear Citizens' Jury: an ethical case for importing nuclear wastes
By Noel Wauchope, published 25/10/2016

Greetings Contemptible Troll. It appears you have aroused the dudgeon of Craig Minns and by doing so you have earned his undying contempt. It could be that his ire at we poor and powerless Contemptibles has been boosted by the report from Stephen Long on the Australian Broadcasting Corp's news page:
<http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-08/should-south-australia-be-storing-nuclear-waste-above-ground/8003156>

Obviously your beautifully argued posts have reduced the NWD Proponents to bluster and contrived invective aimed at the messenger and ignoring the issue. It was that way from the start, wasn't it? Agree with entrenched vested interests or earn their contempt and be branded as uneducated mavericks.

Thanks to the ABC's report it's now revealed just what a cabal of liars and deceivers the Proponents are. It is very likely that Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce has been treated in similar fashion. I have a feeling he's not a Happy Little Vegemite after being nailed in Long's article. But economist Dr Young, a skeptic, has been vindicated after suffering Proponent attacks on his objectivity and character and the blatant deception perpetrated on him by the organisers Democracy Co.

Contemptible, [may I presume to a first-name basis after just one post to you?] After all, to rejoice in a name given you by the Proponents must be counted as a generous tribute, an escutcheon on your shield proclaiming Truth, Justice and the Australian Way! However, I'm not sure the Proponents intended it so. Though I would caution you not to leap off tall buildings in a single bound as severe injury can result. Anyhow, the Contemptibles would be proud if you would purport to represent them in any future contretemps.

I trust it may be allowed that my own unworthy and inadequate meanderings have contributed in some small measure to the success of the Contemptibles so far. If it is found necessary to man the barricades and ramparts to counter a fresh offensive it would be a shot in the arm if you would answer the call.

Craig,

When I offered an apology, it was in the interests of maintaining cordial and reasoned debate. I should have realised that trying to reason with an ignorant and pathetic failure with anger issues, was a waste of time. Unable to formulate a cogent argument you resort time and again to abuse and lies to cover up your impotence.

I should feel pity, but I just don't have time to care for such a loser.

Of course nuclear material is stored above ground until ready to sink, Pogi. If it's judged safe to do so for the first shipment, why not with each new shipment? Hardly a gotcha!

I await a referendum based on a fully, publically interrogated business plan, and, on whether land that indigenous folk don't use should be locked away from the public.