AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: uranium solubility and acute and chronicexposures on the Russia-Georgia border

[Rainer.Facius at dlr.de]

Gary,

you may be right. However, maintaining a factual and civilized tenor in answering James Salsman's rigmarole strains my composure to an extent I only rarely can afford. I have tried a few times only to provoke his standard reflex of switching the issue - and his one competence appears to be his ability of doing this ad infinitum. Monotonous, stereotyped rebuttals on the other hand are not my style of discourse. Therefore I cannot but ignore his 'contributions'. Sorry!

Good luck and kind regards, Rainer


________________________________

Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl im Auftrag von garyi at trinityphysics.com
Gesendet: Mi 13.08.2008 16:48
An: Carl A. Willis; radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: uranium solubility and acute and chronicexposures on the Russia-Georgia border



Hi Carl,

I'm with you in spirit, but James does not want to chat with people he already agrees with. 
His desire is for everyone to join him in his ... belief.  Until he gets that he will seek out forums
like this one.  So the choices are to remain silent and tacitly validate his assertions on
Radsafe, or to counter his misinformation.  IMHO, the world has seen far too much of the first
sort of choice.  If the wise won't speak up, then fools will rule.

I agree with you that it is very tedious to watch arguments that were shown to be wrong a
month ago endlessly recycled and lifted up as bright and new ideas.  If you really can't
stomach it then make use of your email client to filter any messages to or from Salsman. 

However, it would be over far sooner with happier results if a large fraction of the list would
speak up and say they think he's wrong (if indeed they do think so).  I imagine it would be
very hard for Salsman to continue after hundreds of posts from various Radsafe experts tell
him he's wrong. 

How about it Radsafe?  Either continue to endorse Salsman with your silence, or speak up at
least once to put the DU circus to rest.

-Gary Isenhower


On 12 Aug 2008 at 22:23, Carl A. Willis wrote:


[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ]

We need to perform a troll-ectomy up in this piece!

If James Salsman and his counter-respondents want to give continued
lip service to the perennially trollacious DU issue (troll material =
agenda-driven, ad-hominem, bankrupt of new informational value), why
don't you guys go start a forum or listserv of your own to handle just
the amateur DU debate!  The process of starting a list or forum is
free and easy these days.  Call it "DUSafe," get the irrelevant
flamewar on to your hearts' content, and stop sucking up all the
bandwidth on RADSAFE.

In fact, it would enormously benefit my perception of your
motives--regardless of your stance on uranium--if you would have the
courtesy to do this.  I suspect there is a vast silent majority of
subscribers whose areas of interest and work have nothing to do with
the present kerfuffle and would also welcome the return to
professionalism and objectivity.

-Carl

_______________________________________________
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/
_______________________________________________
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/