Re: Two things ....Re: Poll Results...Questions and Surmising
in response to
by
posted on
Sep 26, 2019 12:26PM
NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)
... I was surprised to read the petition regarding the proposed ferrochrome facility in the Soo, as I expected it to express sentiment along the lines of requesting an assurance from their Mayor that all of the potential enironmental and health impact assessments would be strictly adhered to as manadated by provincial and federal regulations and that adequate opportunity for public education input would be paramount. Instead, it is a completly biased " Say NO to ferrochrome production in Sault Ste. Marie", and nearly 6,500 individuals (of a population of ~73,000) have already signed their name in support of the petition. I am highly doubtful that the Soo will be the benficiary of this facility, given the strong "reaction" to date
This is the reality of our society. Our population has been "dumbed down" through the years. Attentions spans have been shrinking and critical inquiry seems to have been relegated to the dustbin, or operhaps is seen as "old-fashioned". We have created a media world wherein opinions are expressed in the 128 character Twitterverse and based largely on emotion , being expressed as a thumbs up or down on a Facebook posting. Whatever happened to : these are the facts , these are the statistics, this is the science...now proceed and make an informed choice.
I would be very afraid if I ever was in the position to be at the mercy of any of these individuals being on a jury wherein I was the defendant!
I wonder how many of these signatories understand that nearly anything can be toxic to humans and /or our ecosystem- including water. (It's one of the first things that I learned in a senior (400- level) University course on environmental toxicology).
I wonder how many of these signatories willingly inhale the nicotine delivery apparatus known as cigarettes which contain "250 known harmful chemicals, at least 69 of which can cause cancer..including chromium".
I wonder how many of these signatories have researched correlations between smoking prevalaence rates in Ontario Cities (including theirs) with the incidence/prevalence rates of lung and other cancers in their city.
I wonder how many of them are aware that the city formerly maintained a Chromium Mining and Smelting Corporation complex ( Located between the Sault Transit building on Huron Street and the railway tracks: https://www.sootoday.com/local-news/more-of-saults-industrial-past-disappears-10-photos-168694 )
I wonder how many of them understand that medical school curriculums (as per my own educational background/experience ) do not include manadory education regarding environmental medicine. Thus , however well-intentioned they might be , the majority of physicians have not had training to comment (unless they've personally studied/researched such issues on theiir own). Physicians and teachers/Academic are not beyond reproach...
These are the ramblings of somebody who was raised in the Soo (until age 18) , and who still has familiy living there (including my parents who are in their 80s) and who has spent five summers planting trees in Northern Ontario (probably 250,000 in totatl) including northern areas such as the Chapleau game reserve, and other areas north of Wawa and north of Dubreuilville, Ontario.
Cheers,
Luker