- The Precautionary Principle
Posted by walter
on May 22, 2020, 11:03 am, in reply to "Re: Rippon - what do you say to my mate who reckons"
|
Don't be turned round by onus reversal! Precautionary principle https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240435/ (Says might become policy and law, haha) Think it's EU law or policy, but flouted anyway by not recognizing there is a risk. https://www.ecologic.eu/1126 What about the UK - what happened to The Precautionary Principle here? This maybe? UK withdrawal bill 'rips the heart out of environmental law', say campaigners Other key elements of EU legal protection, the polluter pays, and the principle that preventative action should be taken to avert environmental damage, have also been ruled out in the bill as a means to protect the natural world from damage by policymakers, development or industry after Brexit. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/17/uk-withdrawal-bill-rips-the-heart-out-of-environmental-law-say-campaigners If the PP did apply as it was supposed to be, there would be no mobiles because the science indicates risks. This is far more than needed - under the precautionary principle the proponents need to demonstrate safety, and that would be a hopeless task. In any regime paying heed to words with 'caution' in them The onus is not on you to prove safety, but rather it is enough to prove that safety has not been demonstrated. The extent of the danger matters - but given we are going to be immersed in these new microwaves to a level never experienced before, and that for this to happen there are going to be 60000-70000 little satellites put into orbit (after a hundred or so of these launches astronomers were complaining they were spoiling their pictures, so there are other effects to consider) we can assume we will be swamped. Even the social effects will be drastic, and I think these will be major environmental concern in themselves. |