[ RadSafe ] Scientific Consensus

[Muckerheide, Jim (CDA)]

What you say is true, but it doesn't really address Bernie's proposal.
I don't see that he is proposing to follow the use of 'global warming
fear tactics' here.  He seems to be just proposing to document the
concurrence of those (of us) who "support nuclear power" to produce a
large, broad, "scientific consensus."

OTOH, the 17,000 signatures of "scientists" (and others) who challenged
global warming has not rejected the premise of "scientific consensus."
Unfortunately, the "Sci Con" that has developed is more a product of the
premise that the formal IPCC and other funded (by governments)
scientists and their publications support the premise that anthropogenic
carbon is causing global warming.  There is no open forum.  

There is no such accumulation of orchestrated formal review processes to
push media response to document and support nuclear power.  Each
professional society (beyond ANS and HPS, e.g., ASME, IEEE, APS, ACS,
etc.) does, or should, produce support documents.  Those position
statements should be collected, with documents of the number of members.


This could also include the unions and other interests, like NAM. (We
could even try to get positive statements from some oil, gas and coal
interests.)

Of course, we could start this by starting with those we know are
already on the record!

Regards, Jim 
 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl 
>[mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of LNMolino at aol.com
>Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 10:42 AM
>To: radsafe at radlab.nl
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Scientific Consensus
>
> 
> 
>In a message dated 3/16/2007 9:01:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
>blc+ at pitt.edu writes:
>
>---Whether or not "scientific consensus" is an oxymoron, the 
>global  warming 
>people have sold it to the media and to the public as though 
>it is the  truth. 
>I am suggesting that we take advantage of their successful 
>"sell". If  the 
>media and thr public now believe that the scientific consensus 
>is close to  "the 
>truth", that could be a powerful tool for us.
>
>
>Yes true BUT is this different in some moral way than what the 
>anti  nuke 
>folks do with the "public perception of radiation? 
> 
>Science should take the road at all times yes? 
> 
>I used to be of the mind set that was in total agreement of 
>what you said  
>but I've come to decide that I as an individual won't stoop to 
>the level of my  
>enemy. 
> 
>My overall take on "global warming" is that of course the 
>growth of man has  
>an impact on the planet it is after all an ecosystem hence all 
>things in that  
>system affects the operations of that system, we DO and have 
>sent a lot of 
>bad  things out into the environment and there at some point 
>has got to be a  
>balancing act by Mother Nature and she can for want of a 
>better term be one hell 
> of a bitch. I however do not buy that in 20 years and the 
>like all life will 
>end  and so fourth as some ultra extreme eco types will 
>purport. I agree that 
>they  sold it to the public at large for the most part and if 
>you look at 
>advertising  by say the big oil guys you see they see that 
>they have bought in to 
>it as well.  I however won't exploit those "fears" for the 
>purpose of nuclear 
>energy. 
> 
>Louis N.  Molino, Sr., CET
>FF/NREMT-B/FSI/EMSI
>Freelance  Consultant/Trainer/Author/Journalist/Fire 
>Protection  Consultant
>LNMolino at aol.com
>
>979-412-0890 (Cell Phone)
>979-690-7559  (IFW/TFW/FSS Office)
>979-690-7562 (IFW/TFW/FSS Fax)
>
>"A Texan with a  Jersey Attitude"
>
>"Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss  events; Small minds 
>discuss people" Eleanor Roosevelt - US diplomat &  reformer 
>(1884 - 1962)
>
>The comments contained in this E-mail are the  opinions of the 
>author and the 
>author alone. I in no way ever intend to speak  for any person or 
>organization that I am in any way whatsoever involved or  
>associated with unless I 
>specifically state that I am doing so. Further this  E-mail is 
>intended only for its 
>stated recipient and may contain private and or  confidential 
>materials 
>retransmission is strictly prohibited unless placed in  the 
>public domain by the 
>original author.
>
>
>
>************************************** AOL now offers free 
>email to everyone. 
> Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
>_______________________________________________
>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/
>
>