Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

David Suzuki "Rediculous, Crazy, Insane"........


Recommended Posts

Looks like the old fellow has shot himself in the foot again......the same kind of crap that he spews out on Climate Change. As one of the critics said "When he’s in his own field, he’s usually reasonable." - but that field is Genetics........

Three months after making the wildly overblown claim that a second nuclear emergency at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant would require the evacuation of the North American West Coast, environmentalist David Suzuki said he “regrets” the comments.
Nevertheless, the Nature of Things host did not seem to go so far as to renege the claim, which has baffled nuclear scientists.
.......................................................

"I’m sorry, but that is ridiculous,” David Measday, a professor emeritus of nuclear physics at the University of British Columbia, told the magazine in regards to the evacuation claims. He added, “it’s totally impossible! I can’t believe he would say that. When he’s in his own field, he’s usually reasonable. But this is just crazy.”

Mycle Schneider, the lead author of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report — and a notable critic of nuclear energy—had a similar reaction. “I’m really, really shocked about the way it’s being discussed in Canada. It’s just totally insane,” he was quoted as saying in Monday’s Province feature.


Link: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/david-suzuki-regrets-claim-that-another-fukushima-disaster-would-require-mass-evacuations-in-north-america

Link to post
Share on other sites

That link is two years old.

However, the critic who said "When he's in his own field, he's usually reasonable" was a nuclear physicist and I guess that is why the critic was unaware that Suzuki is not reasonable in his own field, and hasn't been for decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That link is two years old.

However, the critic who said "When he's in his own field, he's usually reasonable" was a nuclear physicist and I guess that is why the critic was unaware that Suzuki is not reasonable in his own field, and hasn't been for decades.

You're right - the link is from 2014 but it was in today's National Post as a "related article" to Ontario's $12.8 billion investment in the Darlington refurbishment project. I hadn't noticed the date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know a ton about Suzuki. When was the last time he actually professionally practiced science in a lab or out in the field etc.? Or was involved in professional academics (university teaching, research)? if I were him I would probably just be a TV host and make speeches for money and that would be my career, I wonder if that's the case with him the last couple of decades?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know a ton about Suzuki. When was the last time he actually professionally practiced science in a lab or out in the field etc.? Or was involved in professional academics (university teaching, research)? if I were him I would probably just be a TV host and make speeches for money and that would be my career, I wonder if that's the case with him the last couple of decades?

I heard him on local radio a few years ago, being interviewed about his latest book. He was on one of those national book tours that authors do to sell their stuff. It consists of flying non stop for a month or more in hydrocarbon spewing aircraft and riding around cities in particulate belching automobiles. The live radio show (CBC of course) had a phone in segment, which of course was carefully screened so that only the most gushing admirers of Dr Suzuki could toss a softball question at him between intervals of licking his intimate bits .

My question was predictable,and equally predictably did not get on air, I could not get past the screener.. It was " do you feel even the slightest bit of hypocrisy about the destructive nature of your personal actions that you personally chose to sell your books". Oh, and the irony was the subject of the book. It was not a book about the environment or those who choose to damage it(like the author) or a call to arms for activists. The book he was promoting was the second volume of his own autobiography.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The live radio show (CBC of course) had a phone in segment, which of course was carefully screened so that only the most gushing admirers of Dr Suzuki could toss a softball question at him between intervals of licking his intimate bits .

I'm going to use that line in all sorts of situations now, thank you.

His academic career is somewhat impressive, from wikipedia:

Suzuki received his B.A. in Biology in 1958 from Amherst College in Massachusetts, where he first discovered genetics study,[6] and his Ph.D. in Zoology from the University of Chicago in 1961.

Early in his research career he studied genetics using the popular model organism Drosophila melanogaster (fruit flies). To be able to use his initials in naming any new genes he found, he studied dominant temperature-sensitive (DTS) phenotypes. (As he jokingly noted at a lecture at Johns Hopkins University, the only alternative subject was "(damn) tough skin".) He was a professor in the genetics department (stated in his book Genethics: The Ethics of Engineering Life, 1988) at the University of British Columbia for almost forty years, from 1963 until his retirement in 2001, and has since been professor emeritus at a university research institute.

A PhD, and a prof for almost 40 years, pretty good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

His academic career is somewhat impressive, from wikipedia:

A PhD, and a prof for almost 40 years, pretty good.

His academic career most likely sounds much more impressive then it actually was. He only published a handful of papers (4 or 5, about half as first author), and nothing since about 1971. They say academics is publish or perish, and he wasn't publishing. I have never been able to find any evidence of him taking on any research graduate students (and no papers where he is the corresponding author confirms this). I don't know of any class that he taught since the 70s - although it wouldn't surprise me if his uni set up a system where he remained a professor in the 80s and 90s if he showed up for 20 minutes each semester to "teach" for a couple minutes during a first year genetics lecture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right - the link is from 2014 but it was in today's National Post as a "related article" to Ontario's $12.8 billion investment in the Darlington refurbishment project. I hadn't noticed the date.

just another avenue for you to continue your opt displayed disdain for Suzuki.

.

I heard him on local radio a few years ago, being interviewed about his latest book. He was on one of those national book tours that authors do to sell their stuff. It consists of flying non stop for a month or more in hydrocarbon spewing aircraft and riding around cities in particulate belching automobiles.

yet another lame grab at the 'carbon footprint' thingee... which is, of course, mice-nuts in relative terms to the big emissions picture

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A PhD, and a prof for almost 40 years, pretty good.

Congrats to Dave for getting the PhD and the job as professor. After that: tenure and sleepytime while paid and privileged. His career as a 'personality' dominated his life long before he 'retired'. I think Anthony Bourdain may be the only guy with a better job than a tenured professor.

yet another lame grab at the 'carbon footprint' thingee... which is, of course, mice-nuts in relative terms to the big emissions picture

Aren't we all supposed to contribute Waldo? Don';t we all have a personal stake, except Dr Suzuki? I know it wounds you to hear your icons criticized for what they actually do in their lives, as opposed to telling me what to do with mine, but please try to get that quivering lower lip under control.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't we all supposed to contribute Waldo? Don';t we all have a personal stake, except Dr Suzuki? I know it wounds you to hear your icons criticized for what they actually do in their lives, as opposed to telling me what to do with mine, but please try to get that quivering lower lip under control.

my earlier reference was to your somewhat weasely move in drawing a reference to me... but not actually quoting anything related of mine in your post. Now... in this latest case, you actually quote a statement of mine... but purposely exclude the pertinent part of the quote to identify just who stated it. Nice! Do you have a particular reason for doing this - for following these types of practices? Are you somewhat hesitant to have someone directly notified that you've quoted them? What's the deelio here, hey?

I know it, as you say, "wounds you" to have someone point out the nonsense of you presuming to highlight that 'carbon footprint' talking point. Yup, apparently to you, anyone who advocates for sustainable living, renewable energy, climate change recognition, etc.. can't actually travel by air... anywhere! Clearly, to you, Suzuki should just bicycle across North America... the world!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. His own words do that - he needs no help from me.

ya ya, you claim to have unknowingly grabbed a years old article reference! :lol: Suzuki made a statement in what he called an 'off-the-cuff' remark... it wasn't done in a formal setting, it wasn't something he expected to be carried forward by SuzukiBashers... like you! Of course he shouldn't have made the statement; however, it was made in regards the worst case scenario put forward by the 2013 World Nuclear Report organization: "The worst-case scenario, as depicted by the Chairman of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission in the middle of the crisis in March 2011, remains the collapse of the spent fuel pool of unit 4 and a subsequent fuel fire, potentially requiring evacuation of up to 10 million people in a 250 km radius of Fukushima, including a significant part of Tokyo". I expect Suzuki was extending upon raised concerns over radiation and ocean currents... concerns still being raised, particularly in regards to uncertainties of long-term exposure. Obviously, there wasn't any focus on impacts to the west-coast of North America within that worst case scenario put forward... but, of course, SuzukiBashers won't accept his own words where he regrets making that original statement! Of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Dr Suzuki takes comfort in his dotage, knwoing that no matter what he says or does there is a solid conga line of apologists that will act

my earlier reference was to your somewhat weasely move in drawing a reference to me... but not actually quoting anything related of mine in your post. Now... in this latest case, you actually quote a statement of mine... but purposely exclude the pertinent part of the quote to identify just who stated it. Nice! Do you have a particular reason for doing this - for following these types of practices? Are you somewhat hesitant to have someone directly notified that you've quoted them? What's the deelio here, hey?

I know it, as you say, "wounds you" to have someone point out the nonsense of you presuming to highlight that 'carbon footprint' talking point. Yup, apparently to you, anyone who advocates for sustainable living, renewable energy, climate change recognition, etc.. can't actually travel by air... anywhere! Clearly, to you, Suzuki should just bicycle across North America... the world!

Do you feel it is unreasonable, in this age of Internet, to expect that one of our most prominent environmental crusaders could have used some ultramodern device to communicate his message? It was a radio interview, one of many such. Perhaps he could have tried something really cutting edge, like the telephone instead of visiting every CBC studio in Canada? Which he also did, as he complained about exhausting all this vital work was for him.

Of course, what could be more important for him than getting out the Gospel on saving our planet than flying (first or business class, always). After all, what is more important to climate change than promoting the second Volume of your autobiography?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect Suzuki was extending upon raised concerns over radiation and ocean currents...

Is that what you "expect" he was trying to say? He certainly did "extend" it - from the absolute worst case scenario of 250 km to the Suzuki blarney of 7500 km (Japan to Canada's West Coast). I guess that gives you top ranking as a Suzuki apologist, hey?

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that what you "expect" he was trying to say? He certainly did "extend" it - from the absolute worst case scenario of 250 km to the Suzuki blarney of 7500 km (Japan to Canada's West Coast). I guess that gives you top ranking as a Suzuki apologist, hey?

says MLW's resident SuzukiBasher! :lol: Like I said, there are still concerns being raised about long-term radiation exposure... and those aren't coming from Suzuki. But hey now, your ploy to dredge up a years old article has you clearly reveling - bashers be bashing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you feel it is unreasonable, in this age of Internet, to expect that one of our most prominent environmental crusaders could have used some ultramodern device to communicate his message? It was a radio interview, one of many such. Perhaps he could have tried something really cutting edge, like the telephone instead of visiting every CBC studio in Canada? Which he also did, as he complained about exhausting all this vital work was for him.

Of course, what could be more important for him than getting out the Gospel on saving our planet than flying (first or business class, always). After all, what is more important to climate change than promoting the second Volume of your autobiography?

keep relying on that "mice-nuts impacting" personal carbon foot-print BS... while you completely ignore the degree of actual carbon emissions and where they principally originate. I'll also call BS on your convenient anecdote - "Letters to my Grandchildren" is certainly more than your declared "autobiography - 2nd volume"!

on edit: given the relative trivial impact of personal carbon footprints in relation to world-wide industry originated emissions, I would suggest you are reaching... over-reaching... to attempt to denigrate Suzuki. Certainly you can do better than relying upon this tired talking point.

.

Edited by waldo
Link to post
Share on other sites

keep relying on that "mice-nuts impacting" personal carbon foot-print BS... while you completely ignore the degree of actual carbon emissions and where they principally originate. I'll also call BS on your convenient anecdote - "Letters to my Grandchildren" is certainly more than your declared "autobiography - 2nd volume"!

on edit: given the relative trivial impact of personal carbon footprints in relation to world-wide industry originated emissions, I would suggest you are reaching... over-reaching... to attempt to denigrate Suzuki. Certainly you can do better than relying upon this tired talking point.

.

You misunderstood. It isn't my autobiography, it is Suzukis, Volume 2. You can check, it does exist.

Why would you condone and actually cheerlead such a wanton, wasteful rape of The Earth? Principaly originate?- I am quite sure that greenhouse gases come out of jet engines used to promote vanity book tours. Or did you mean Dr Suzuki is a Prince?

Other weell known activists like Neil Young arrivd here in pimped out zero emission vehicles. Are you saying David is above this, he is exempt from any accusation of hypocrisy?

I can see where I went wrong here, by implying that CBC Radio and TV would lick his intimate bits between tossing softball questions. I confess I saw only part of that, the rest was off camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstood. It isn't my autobiography, it is Suzukis, Volume 2. You can check, it does exist.

Why would you condone and actually cheerlead such a wanton, wasteful rape of The Earth? Principaly originate?- I am quite sure that greenhouse gases come out of jet engines used to promote vanity book tours. Or did you mean Dr Suzuki is a Prince?

Other weell known activists like Neil Young arrivd here in pimped out zero emission vehicles. Are you saying David is above this, he is exempt from any accusation of hypocrisy?

I can see where I went wrong here, by implying that CBC Radio and TV would lick his intimate bits between tossing softball questions. I confess I saw only part of that, the rest was off camera.

how droll! I didn't misunderstand anything - I gave you the name of the book I believe you're speaking to. Of course, and even now, after multiple posts on this you can't seem to spice-up your anecdote with the actual name of the book. Why are you so hesitant to providing actual supporting details? And again, I don't interpret that book as an autobiographical book, whatever phase you choose to deem it.

let's frame the trivial nature of your fake-outrage: a carbon footprint calculator will advise that a flight from Vancouver to Toronto will add 2.14 metric tons of CO2e to a personal carbon footprint... of course, that scheduled flight would be traveling whether Suzuki buys a ticket on it, or not. The published figure for 2014 suggests there was a combined world-wide creation of 35.7 billion tonnes (Gt) global CO2 emissions. And you choose to keep harping on an individuals personal footprint while completely ignoring the bigger picture?

on that same front we have had MLW member Simple try a similar tactic in regards Leonardo DiCaprio... another of his fav targets. Unfortunately I burst that bubble when I brought forward the offset calculation and offset purchase approach DiCaprio follows to deal with those so preoccupied with his personal footprint. Even if Suzuki didn't formally buy offsets I'm quite content to suggest all his other advocating and activist related actions/positions, in themselves, are a veritable offset generator! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suzuki made a statement in what he called an 'off-the-cuff' remark... it wasn't done in a formal setting, it wasn't something he expected to be carried forward by SuzukiBashers... like you!

This is actually the biggest problem with Suzuki - for years he has been globe trotting, talking to audiences of fervent admirers who think that he is imparting objective scientific knowledge to them instead of sensationalist anti-science comments to promote his own agenda. Every once in a while when he faces an audience which have real scientists they show that he really doesn't know what he is talking about, and now that recordings from general audiences are common Suzuki is starting to realize that when he lies he might actually get called on it for once.

Of course he shouldn't have made the statement; however, it was made in regards the worst case scenario put forward by the 2013 World Nuclear Report organization

Well he shouldn't have made the comment because it was a complete lie, and has zero corollary with the worst case scenario put forward by the chairman of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission made at the time of the crisis when there was the most unknowns and hysteria was at its height; and agreed to as the world case scenario by the 2013 World Nuclear Industry Status Report....a report put out by an anti-nuclear organization whose anti-nuclear lead author, Mycle Schneider, was at least honest enough despite his anti-nuclear position to say this about Suzuki's comments: "I'm really, really shocked about the way it's being discussed in Canada. It's just totally insane."

When the head of an anti-nuclear organization, who has earned his living for decades from opposing nuclear energy to the extent that he won the "alternative nobel prize" in 1997 (the right livelihood award) for it, says that Suzuki's comments promoting fear of nuclear energy are insane it is probably time to stop defending him. There is no excuse for his comments.

As to the rest of your nonsensical fear-mongering about long-term exposure and ocean current radiation, this kind of fear-mongering kills people.

It kills people because the lies spread about radiation leave governments feeling that they have to act in extreme ways like the government did in Japan with their evacuation - an evacuation which itself is believed to be responsible for 1600 deaths in order to protect people from long-term cancer risks that were so small they were considered undetectable. And leaves evacuated Japanese victims in the absurd situation where they could move to many, many places throughout the world where the natural background radiation would be higher then they would face if they were allowed to move back home.

And it kills people because it leads to opposition to nuclear energy - which both makes nuclear plants unnecessarily expensive, leaves older model nuclear plants online longer when in a rational world they would be replaced by more modern ones, leaves nuclear plants offline due to the politics of fear, instead resulting in increased fossils fuels being burned - which really does kill people.

A rational environmental movement would be disgusted by Suzuki and the harm he causes to society and the environment.

Edited by biotk
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is actually the biggest problem with Suzuki - for years he has been globe trotting, talking to audiences of fervent admirers who think that he is imparting objective scientific knowledge to them instead of sensationalist anti-science comments to promote his own agenda.

what agenda... exactly? Let's have your answer properly frame your claimed "anti-science" reference. Does anyone who advocates for conservation, sustainability, renewable energy, recognizing the impacts of warming/climate change, diversification away from fossil-fuels, etc., ... fit within your "anti-science" labeling?

if calling the statement a "lie" is comforting to you... again, he walked it back and stated he regretted making it ; notwithstanding it was never stated in a formal venue/capacity where it would have been heard by more than a few individuals. But yes, you're right - SuzukiBashers got a hold of it and are relentless in their vitriolic attack. How many times did you write "anti-nuclear"? :D

clearly blaming anti-nuclear proponents is an easy and convenient way for you to ignore the huge capital costs of nuclear, the decade+ time frame to deploy a new plant, safety/radioactive waste/efficiency/etc. concerns with 3rd gen nuclear, actual 'meltdown' accidents, etc..

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if calling the statement a "lie" is comforting to you... again, he walked it back and stated he regretted making it ; notwithstanding it was never stated in a formal venue/capacity where it would have been heard by more than a few individuals. But yes, you're right - SuzukiBashers got a hold of it and are relentless in their vitriolic attack.

As I expected instead of doing the intellectually honest thing and actually looking up what happened here, you, just like Suzuki does, simply made up a narrative that suits your own ideology. While, as I said, Suzuki finally has to worry about "Suzukibashers" exposing the lies he spouts (and that is a good thing), this was not one of those cases.

First of all, despite your lie that the claim would have only been heard by a few individuals, Suzuki's statement was made in the non-formal venue/capacity of the sold out Myer Horowitz theatre (capacity 720) at the U of Alberta for the "Letting in the Light" symposium on water ecology. A fan of Suzuki, Aaron Paquette, uploaded to youtube that specific part of Suzuki's talk because he absolutely believed Suzuki. Over the next couple days it was watched 38000 times on his obscure channel before it was picked up by places like the Huffpo and RT - all believing the claims. Because of the popularity of the claims, Vice reported on it 9 days after Suzuki made the remarks. They had the good sense to ask a couple experts what they thought about his remarks and that was the first time any science or evidence-based remarks accompanied Suzuki's nonsense. We are such a scientifically illiterate country duped by the lies of people like Suzuki, that he can make claims so off the mark that a prominent anti-nuclear activist referred to them as "totally insane" and it took three months for (a couple) major media outlets to pick up on Suzuki's lies and for Suzuki to "regret" getting caught. So the whole incident was the complete opposite from start to finish from what you claim it was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I expected instead of doing the intellectually honest thing and actually looking up what happened here, you, just like Suzuki does, simply made up a narrative that suits your own ideology.

So the whole incident was the complete opposite from start to finish from what you claim it was.

given your new shininess here... for just your 30 odd posts and a single exchange with me, are you actually prepared to define, as you say, "my ideology"? And aren't you quite selective in what you're prepared to quote of mine... and ignore! Clearly, you want nothing to do with stepping-up and qualifying your earlier statement where you declare a "Suzuki agenda... one based on anti-science".

thanks for reinforcing what I stated! Good on ya. The video quality, extreme side angle coverage and distance from the casual format of '2 guys sitting around', clearly aligns with exactly what I stated... like uhhh, phone camera anyone! This was not a formal setting, one driven by media coverage - there was no "playing to the media; playing to the photographers, playing to the professional video camera". Suzuki wasn't making a speech, reading a prepared script/document... he simply chimed in with a comment following on the principal's leading statements. And your uber fake-outrage stems from nothing more than a most 'off-the-cuff' single sentence where Suzuki states, "I have seen a paper which says that if in fact the fourth plant goes under in an earthquake and those rods are exposed, it’s bye bye Japan and everybody on the west coast of North America should evacuate".

does your concern extend to the referenced paper too? :lol: Apparently, you want Suzuki to be held responsible for all the hype generated by his bashers! Yeesh! Notwithstanding you've already implicated Suzuki in being responsible for, "expensive... and inefficient... nuclear" - while at the same time, you refuse to acknowledge, "the actual long-standing huge capital costs of nuclear, the decade+ time frame to deploy a new plant, safety/radioactive waste/efficiency/etc. concerns with 3rd gen nuclear, little-to-no political will to support/fund so-called "next/4th gen" nuclear, actual 'meltdown' accidents, etc.."

yes indeedee! You're very selective, aren't you? Bashers gonna bash, hey!

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for reinforcing what I stated! Good on ya. The video quality, extreme side angle coverage and distance from the casual format of '2 guys sitting around', clearly aligns with exactly what I stated... like uhhh, phone camera anyone! This was not a formal setting, one driven by media coverage - there was no "playing to the media; playing to the photographers, playing to the professional video camera". Suzuki wasn't making a speech, reading a prepared script/document... he simply chimed in with a comment following on the principal's leading statements. And your uber fake-outrage stems from nothing more than a most 'off-the-cuff' single sentence where Suzuki states, "I have seen a paper which says that if in fact the fourth plant goes under in an earthquake and those rods are exposed, it’s bye bye Japan and everybody on the west coast of North America should evacuate".

The dripping apologist is still at it. The quality was exceptional - very stable, nice slow panning. Must have been a great cell phone and a very professional user! Not a formal setting? Over 700 people.....and you don't think that when Suzuki says something, it won't somehow work it's way into the public domain? Off the cuff remark? He had obviously practiced his whole schtick - with a substantial lead-in before dropping his "terrifying" bombshell - you know - the ridiculous, insane one.

Why not just admit it was a very dumb thing to say - because his credibility is eroding faster that the shores of Kiribati.

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...