Indeed, there are indications that China is pursuing
nanotechnology.
As to Mikle Lorrey's comment on "failing" to prove a
catastrophe resulting from nuclear mishaps--anyone
recall a certain Russian radwaste storage facility
going critical and devastating the surrounding
countryside? Also--how many thousands has Chernobyl
killed? How many more WILL it kill? We may never know.
How many deaths, in your opinion, constitute a
catastrophe?
My point, however, was not to prove that a catastrophe
has occurred; my point was to prove that serious
mistakes WILL be made. Nanotechnology will not
tolerate single mistakes. Incidents which, with
nuclear technology, resulted in zero to a few thousand
deaths, will with nanotechnology quite conceivably
destroy the planet.
The point is not whether a nuclear catastrophe has in
fact occurred. The point is that the first
nanotechnology catastrophe (which will result from
"lesser" mistakes than have already been made with
nuclear technology) will very likely be the last.
john marlow
Damien Broderick wrote:
At 05:47 PM 5/01/01 -0500, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>What you fail to show with your many examples of one
case where
>catastrophe resulted from nuclear accidents.
Chernobyl is the best
>candidate, and that was more an accident that proved
the incompetency of
>communism, not nuclear technology.
What a stroke of luck that no nation today is
communist!
Well, aside from the most populous one in the world.
Damien Broderick
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:16 MDT