[ RadSafe ] Is Greenhouse Debate Appropriate?? ---Re: Salsman warning

[garyi at trinityphysics.com]

Hi Stewart,

I generally agree with your thought that Radsafe is about radiation safety, not climate.  So I 
will keep it short and sweet.  :)

If your first point below is correct, then why contradict yourself by essentially endorsing 
MMGW on Radsafe?

Also, the credibility and standing of any profession, including nuclear technology, is best 
served by complete honesty, even when the truth is counter to the immediate interests of the 
profession.  I often say that radiation is over regulated.  The obvious corollary is that some of 
us ought not to be employed in this field.  Would that be a bad thing?  Short term, yes.  Long 
term, way better for us and for the world.

-Gary Isenhower


On 11 Apr 2010 at 21:32, Stewart Farber wrote:

----snip----
The basic science and validity of global warming is not an appropriate issue for 
radsafe because the technical issues involved in validating the Greenhouse Effect are 
outside the expertise of almost everyone on radsafe, and it  is not a radiation sciences issue.
----snip---- 
So now some on Radsafe seem compelled to spit into the wind and criticize the Greenhouse 
Effect, something that the majority of the public, media, legislators, and regulators have 
accepted. 
 
These  actions only serve to further alienate outside interests who oppose nuclear sciences, 
and detract from the credibility and standing of nuclear technology professionals.  Humorous 
actually.