[ RadSafe ] Yucca Mountain / o.4 Sv extra radiation over 10 years.... / Miller and McClain, 2007

[ROY HERREN]

James,
 
   Why do you owe Dr. Franta an apology?  Simply because what you did was to take his personal opinion (free speech) from this very public forum and make it into a personal attack on his very livelihood.  Do you recall the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?  
 
>What does it say about an industry that speaking with an employer in a situation like that is frowned on?

I am not suggesting anything, nor am I threatening, but how would you feel if "everyone" on this mailing list who has taken exception to something that you have written over the years were to take it upon themselves to contact your employer about their many grievances with you?  I don't think your employer would appreciate such an action, and I certainly don't think that you would enjoy the potential negative outcome.  There is nothing "magic" about common decency!  Just ask yourself before you do something, if you would be upset if someone did to you whatever it is that you are planning.  If the answer is that you wouldn't appreciate the action, then  reconsider the action before hitting the ""Send" button.  We should all impose self constraint in regards to our "rights to free association and speech".  Our rights should end when they start to trample on anothers rights.  You know full well that you could have cost Dr. Franta his job, his
 very means of making a living.  You trampled on his rights!  Dr. Franta didn't represent his "free speech" public opinion as being that of his employer, therefore you didn't have any need to drag his employer into the fray other than your own malicious intent to inflict harm.  Simple put, you owe Dr. Franta an apology because you let your anger cause you to launch a personal vendetta.

Roy Herren 
 
Roy Herren wrote:

> Have you publicly apologized as of yet to Dr. Franta for having contacted his company's CEO?

>Why?  If someone accused you of trying to help terrorists, would you
>magically lose your right to free association and speech?  Would you
>magically lose your right to complain to the accuser's management?
>What does it say about an industry that speaking with an employer in a
>situation like that is frowned on?



----- Original Message ----
From: James Salsman <BenjB4 at gmail.com>
To: radsafelist <radsafe at radlab.nl>; Dan McCarn <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>; ROY HERREN <royherren2005 at yahoo.com>; Steven Dapra <sjd at swcp.com>; Rainer.Facius at dlr.de
Sent: Saturday, July 5, 2008 3:10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Yucca Mountain / o.4 Sv extra radiation over 10 years.... / Miller and McClain, 2007

Dan McCarn wrote:

> Mike Brennan has sufficiently answered your question....

No, Mike's answer of "zero" is wrong and foolish.  He hasn't even
begun to enumerate all of the ways spent fuel has entered the
environment.  For example, that answer also omits this:

http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Plutonium-Found-Munitions.htm

> I tend to believe that you offer your seeming ignorance as part of a ruse....

Ha!  You accuse me of feigned ignorance but neither you nor anyone
else has been able to offer an accurate figure for the rate at which
spent fuel has and is expected to enter the environment.

> This was one of my IAEA projects back in the 80s in the
> IAEA's Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle to characterize all
> non-reactor nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the world.

Then why are you unable to state a number?

Rainer Facius wrote:

> not a single of the references you provided addresses HERITABLE effects?

Incorrect.  As Dr. Cedervall almost correctly pointed out: "A
teratogen may also, but not necessarily, be a _mutagen_ and therefore
could give heritable ... defects"
http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2008-July/010513.html  (His
"necessarily" part is wrong -- a mutagen is a mutagen and a
teratogenic mutagen has the mechanism of action in the germ cells.)
The Miller and McClain 2007 review clearly indicate mutations and
other chromosome aberrations, and their findings have been adopted by
the U.S. National Research Council:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11979&page=90

Roy Herren wrote:

> Have you publicly apologized as of yet to Dr. Franta for having contacted his company's CEO?

Why?  If someone accused you of trying to help terrorists, would you
magically lose your right to free association and speech?  Would you
magically lose your right to complain to the accuser's management?
What does it say about an industry that speaking with an employer in a
situation like that is frowned on?

Steven Dapra wrote:

> According to McDiarmid et al., so few chromosomal aberrations were
> found that they couldn't perform linear regression on them.

What do you think the relation is between the ability to perform
linear regression and confirmation of their existence?

>  it has become patently obvious to me that you *can't* read reports.

Steve, three months ago you were trying to convince us that uranyl
wasn't teratogenic.  How long do you intend to keep playing the fool?
If you have a problem with the way Miller and McClain characterized
McDairmid's results, please email or phone her at her office.  She is
on Eastern time and returning from her vacation on Monday.

James Salsman