This series is funded by a grant from the Rockefeller Family Foundation.
I wonder how many others recognize how long the Rockefellers have been investing in work that casts doubt on radiation and the ability of radioactive materials to compete with their primary source of wealth and power?
My research has uncovered strategic atomic misinformation investments as early as 1927 when the Rockefeller Foundation funded Hermann Muller's efforts to prove that x-rays cause mutations in fruit flies.
I'm not saying that the Rockefellers pay people to say something they don't believe in. I'm saying that the Rockefellers -- and their hydrocarbon associates -- often give money to support people who are saying things they want the public to hear. They have also been known to use their influence with the press to make sure that stories about the people who are raising concerns about radiation and nuclear energy get more attention than they might actually deserve.
Case in point - on the day that the National Academy of Sciences issued its first report on the Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation the Rockefeller Foundation tapped a member of its board of trustees to make sure that the report was adequately covered. That man, Arthur Sulzberger, was the publisher of the New York Times.
Surprise, surprise, the story not only received an above-the-line, front page headline, but there were about 5 other articles plus a 3 page long, full text version of the Genetics Committee report. That is the report that helped to establishe the "no safe dose" of radiation mantra.
Eager to invest in nukes, utilities took their cue from the AEC Chairman.
By the way, most utilities were definitely NOT eager to invest in nuclear energy. They did not know enough about the technology and did not believe that it was well-proven enough to depend on for economical electric power generation.
Lewis Strauss, who started his working career as a traveling shoe salesman, had to put the hard sell onto them, often introducing the threat that the government would support public ownership of nuclear plants if the private utilties wouldn't invest. At the time, there were few things that investor owned utilties feared more than "public power."
Of course, once they decided to invest, they started to spend a little to promote their investments.
Rod Adams, Publisher, Atomic Insights