[ RadSafe ] The hot and cold of history & journalistic credibility

[Bob Casparius]

JJ Cohen,

Increased use of nuclear power in this country means reducing CO2 emissions 
from coal or oil burning plants. If this is perceived by the public as a 
good thing because it may reduce the effects of global warming, why look a 
gift horse in the mouth. It may not be the best reason for going nuclear. 
But if it works to convince the public we need nuclear power, than add it 
to the list for going nuke and move on.

Bob



At 02:18 PM 2/6/2007, jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ruth Sponsler" <jk5554 at yahoo.com>
>To: <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; "howard long" <hflong at pacbell.net>; "Bill"
><wwebber2004 at comcast.net>; <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 1:04 PM
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] The hot and cold of history & journalistic
>credibility
>
>
> > Climate change and nuclear power are _not_ the same thing.
>
>Ruth,
>     Of course what you say is true from a phenomenological standpoint. What
>I was alluding to was that public attitudes toward both nuclear power and
>global warming are based largely on misinformation. That's why I hate to see
>flaunting the threat of global warming as a means of selling nuclear power.
>With or without this threat nuclear power is a good idea that shouldn't need
>phoney arguments  to support it.
>
>_______________________________________________
>You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
>Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
>the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
>For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/