[ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind

Fri Oct 15 23:00:53 CDT 2010

Jerry:
First, I am not a climatologist. And I made no claim of connection. I also
said I am skeptical. But I keep an open mind. Which, as Mike mentioned, is a
good idea. 
As for the global environment assimilating the "nasty stuff", I would say
that perhaps it can, but to the detriment of all living creatures. Perhaps a
walk along any shoreline will convince you? The amount of man-made garbage
should help convince you we can do better. I suppose the Gulf of Mexico will
recover eventually from the oil spill. But the "dead zone" caused by
fertilizer runoff via the Mississippi should be seen as a fair indication
that nature may have difficulty rebounding from man's detriment. And surely
the health effects of industrial pollutants should give us reason to do
better? 
And relying on the hope that the global environment can rebound from our
detrimental activities is a pretty negative attitude.

I have worked all my life in the oil industry. And seen first-hand the
effects of the poor environmental practices of the past, where drilling
waste was casually dumped, oil spills left to "self-remediate" and oil
extraction causing massive subsidence (have a look at the East coast of Lake
Maracaibo for a fine example). However, this industry currently has a very
different attitude towards the environment and makes  major efforts to limit
pollution (BP's recent fiasco notwithstanding). But they are still seen as a
dirty industry... But little is said of the pollution caused by
agro-business's excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides? Most would
agree that the net impact of nuclear power is far less than coal power. But
the lobbies keep that rolling along. 

I am not offering any solutions to the environmental problems of the world,
as I am in no way qualified to do so. Nor can I offer any idea of what can
be considered cost-effective. And any effective action on a large scale will
be biased by political interests, with distortion of priorities.

But, as a relative layman, I do feel we can do better. And I am pretty sure
that you do too.

Regards
Doug 

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 6:06 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind

Doug,
Your comments raise 3 questions:

1-  Is there reason to believe that "evidence of global climate change" is
not attributable to the current phase of cyclical climate change?
2- Is it possible that the global environment could assimilate whatever
man-made  "nasty stuff" is emitted without significant deterioration?,and
3-When you suggest that "we can do better", I wonder ,how can it be
determined when things are good enough and any further improvement  is
simply not cost-effective? How do we know that we have not already reached
that point?

Jerry Cohen

________________________________
From: Doug Aitken <jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Fri, October 15, 2010 3:32:07 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind

Every so often, we seem to get into this "discussion" where some members
make rather strong statements about the "global warming" issue (note I don't
say "scam", phony science, etc).

I am skeptical regarding the actual cause being man-made, although it would
seem reasonable to say that (1) evidence of global climate change cannot be
reasonably denied - from retreating glaciers to regional temperature
changes, rainfall, etc... and (2) man is spewing larger than ever quantities
of nasty stuff into the atmosphere and water (to the obvious detriment to
all living creatures , cutting vast swathes of forest and using our natural
resources with little thought to the future.

So it would seem to me that any effort to control these human excesses would
benefit all of us. I am not a fanatical green, but certainly do think that
we can do better, whether or not it would impact climate....

Regards

Doug Aitken
QHSE Advisor, D&M Operations Support
Schlumberger,
Drilling & Measurements HQ,
300 Schlumberger Drive, MD15,
Sugar Land, Texas 77478

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Edmond Baratta
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 8:15 PM
To: Jerry Cohen; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind

Those who are for the new 'religion' of Global Warming are using it to make
a profit, i.e. Gore, and the Governments who wishes to make our lives
miserable.  I can't believe that the Government is sponsoring the mercury
(Hg) laden light bulbs.  Previously, they forbade the fluorescent lights
that  contained beryllium (Be).

Ed Baratta

edmond0033 at comcast.net

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jerry Cohen" <jjc105 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:56 PM
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List" 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind

> Mike,
> Of course, you are correct. The climate is changing, but hasn't that 
> always been the case? Historic evidence shows that the climate is 
> cyclical in nature and the earth has continually alternated between 
> "ice ages" and tropical periods.
> Dr.
> Fred Singer, has estimated that these cycles last about 1500 years, 
> and currently increasing global temperatures simply indicate that we 
> are predictably in an upward phase. In time, this trend will reverse, 
> and we can start to worry about global cooling again, if we live that 
> long.
> To attribute  "global warming" to anthropic (man-made) causes is 
> somewhat silly.
> Socialists believe it is due to capitalistic greed. "third world" 
> nations may believe it is caused by developed counties squandering our 
> limited resources; and some may think that witchcraft  is to blame. I 
> never liked witches, so I tend to blame them for everything thats bad.
> In all likelihood, global climate change is controlled by cosmic 
> forces (sunspots, etc) over which man has no control, so maybe we 
> should just sit back and enjoy it.
> Jerry Cohen
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mike Quastel <maay100 at bgu.ac.il>
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing 
> List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Sent: Fri, October 15, 2010 1:13:31 PM
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Climate Change a fraud?
>
> I have been concerned to hear during the past year or so, even  from 
> this otherwise informative and properly skeptical group, statements 
> that findings of climate warming- or more properly climate change- is 
> some sort of fraud, scam or conspiracy. The geologic and oceanographic 
> evidence so far really does seem to support that climate change is 
> taking place in our own lifetime. Whether it will turn out to be man 
> made, a natural cycle, some sort of solar phenomenon, temporary or 
> cumulative in the long run remains to be seen. There is nothing wrong 
> with being skeptical -  indeed, that is the proper scientific approach
> - but in view of the potentially very serious global consequences, it 
> would be wise to keep an open mind on the subject and most definitely 
> not rule out the possibility of human causation.
>
> Mike Quastel
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
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