No subject

company that pulled off the ultimate "Scam designed to make money for
one group" by telling the public that asbestos (the wonder mineral) was
safe for use in any circumstances.  The company knew of the problem but
decided (for $) to keep the information hidden and produce their own
disinformation.  So to answer your question - yes
companies/corporations/governments - can perpetuate the disinformation
if it serves their own self serving best interests.  (The Canadian
government still endorses the mining of asbestos despite the clinical
information).  Sorry - off the soapbox for now.  JW =20

Jon Wardecke, CIH=20
Industrial Hygienist=20

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Bourquin,
Marty
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 11:28 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open
mind?

Temporarily ignoring whether or not the rise in temperature is part of
the natural cycle or is being caused by man made factors - is there
anyone on this list that truly believes that putting over 6.2 billion
(with a B) net tonnes per year of CO2 into the atmosphere will not, in
the long term, have deleterious effects? (heating , cooling, turning the
air pink, whatever)  Do we all also believe that prohibiting the
discharging of CFCs into the atmosphere was a scam designed to make
money for one group or another?

Sorry, but I have children and grandchildren who have to live on this
rock - how can I, in good conscience, not oppose polluting the ground,
water and air?

Marty

Martin W. Bourquin=20
Manager - EHS, RSO=20
W.R. Grace & Co=20
Chattanooga, TN  37406=20
423-697-8216=20

423-309-1547(m)





-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Emer, Dudley
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 12:06 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open
mind?

Considering that Venus is the second closest planet to the sun at 67
Mega miles compared to earth's 93 Mega miles and the solar irradiance is
twice earth's at 2600 W/cm^2.  I guess one could expect a bit of heating
with any atmosphere that is 90 times as dense as earth's.  But comparing
it to earth's global warming is a bit of a stretch.=20

Although I bet if you went for a research grant on that theory the IPPC
money would roll in.

Dudley Emer
Geophysicist
National Security Technologies
Nevada Test Site, Mercury, Nv
702-295-7808 office
702-794-5824 pager
702-521-8577 cell


-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Brent Rogers
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 8:54 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Cc: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open
mind?

True that.  But the average surface temperature is between 450 - 500C,
therefore high CO2 does indeed result in higher temps. =20


> Regards
> Brent Rogers
> Sydney Australia
> (currently on vacation in Hot Springs Arkansas, USA)

Sent from my iPad

On 19/10/2010, at 10:21 AM, "Peter Fear" <FEARP at upstate.edu> wrote:

> But by looking at Wikipedia you should also notice that the atmosphere
of
> Venus is +95% Carbon Dioxide and Earth's is 0.038%. The "large"
percentage
> increase that we have seen is still no where near the amount on Venus.
>=20
> Pete
>=20
>=20
> Peter Fear
> Health Physics Technologist
> SUNY Upstate Medical University
> Radiation Safety Office
> 636 UH
> 750 E. Adams St.
> Syracuse, NY 13210
>=20
> Phone: (315)464-6510
> FAX:     (315)464-5095
> fearp at upstate.edu
>=20
>=20
>=20
>>>> Brent Rogers <brent.rogers at optusnet.com.au> 10/19/2010 10:41 AM >>>
> I lack the competence to debate climate science (other than to note
that
> they strongly correlate with one's political views) but if you really
find
> it "completely false" that increased levels of CO2 increases
temperature may
> I suggest you redirect your wikipedia to the planet of Venus?
>=20
> Regards
> Brent Rogers
> Sydney Australia
> (currently on vacation in Hot Springs Arkansas, USA)
>=20
> Sent from my iPad
>=20
> On 18/10/2010, at 8:46 PM, Emilio Martinez
<emiliommartinez at yahoo.com.ar>
> wrote:
>=20
>>=20
>> Here's an extended version of the graph:
>>=20
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu


_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu