This morning in the Wall Street Journal there was a 2 page article in the Review section written by a Richard A. Muller titled, "The Panic Over Fukushima"
It made me sick because it was yet another piece of propaganda, from its implicit assertion that the dose of radiation received by people in Fukushima was less than the level of radiation that "people happily live with in Denver," to its absolute erasure of all forms of radiation contamination except for gamma.
The article makes me so upset that I really don't think I can analyze it without getting a very bad migraine.
So, instead, I'm going to include some finds about the author of the article by a couple of regular commentators at Enenews (Aigeezer provided these links).
Richard A. Muller (born January 6, 1944) is an American professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley. He is also a faculty senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Academic site: http://www.muller.lbl.gov/
Headlines About Muller:
Richard Muller, Koch Brothers Funded Scientist...
Will the Real Richard Muller Please Stand Up
Majia Here: I think these headlines (and articles) raise questions about Muller's neutrality.
Is the nuclear industry now encouraging him to publicly acknowledge the existence of global warming so that he can be positioned to promote nuclear as an "objective" authority?
He has a new book out. It cannot be searched at amazon. Here is a link and a summary I've pasted from the comment section:
Energy for Future Presidentshttp://www.amazon.com/Energy-Future-Presidents-Science-Headlines/dp/0393081613/ref=la_B000AQ4JZ6_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1345339942&sr=1-1
[excerpted] The book itself is a review of what scientists know about the energy problem not only in the United States but worldwide. In Part I of the book, entitled "Energy Catastrophes", Mr. Mueller discusses two recent energy disasters using a non-emotional analysis. One of the disasters is the tsunami in Japan that damaged the nuclear reactor site as well as homes and factories and human lives.
He feels that the nuclear part of the disaster has been grossly overstated and he gives his reasons for that conclusion. Many people around the world wanted to completely disassociate themselves from nuclear energy after the Fukushima disaster. However, Muller believes that nuclear energy is still a safe energy source and it is important that we not give up on it. He also discusses the Deep water Horizon accident in the gulf, which spurted oil into the sea for seemingly endless days. He also felt that the damage was grossly exaggerated and attempted put it in perspective. He felt the cleanup activities worked well....
Well, doesn't that sound objective.
However, whatever you think of him, his biography provides:
NO CREDENTIALS FOR DISCUSSING THE BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF RADIATION
See here for a glowing biography with not a shred of evidence of any experience with, or knowledge about, the biological effects of radiation http://www-bsac.eecs.berkeley.edu/~muller/biography.html
This is yet another example of widespread and very deliberate efforts by authorities in the media and nuclear industry to manufacture expert opinion and interpretation of news events.
I've found many instances of outright Fukushima propaganda by the journal and other mainstream media, which I've been trying to bring attention to and debunk:
Glaring Propaganda in the Wall Street Journal (2011)
How Does Propaganda Work (2012)
More Propaganda in the Wall Street Journal (2012)
Wall Street Journal Propaganda (2011)
Nuclear Pushes on Despite Fukushima
Plant Erupts into a Poison Fruit
Science Corrupted by Private Funding?