[ RadSafe ] Go Figure: How can you explain cancer clusters?
doug.huffman at wildblue.net
Fri May 13 06:29:12 CDT 2011
I first noticed this phenomena during the UFO craze of a few decades
ago, that correlations of significant rigor can be found in random data.
My use of 'phenomena' prompts me to go on and recommend Stephen R. C.
Hicks' Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau
to Foucault (Scholargy, Tempe, 2004, ISBN 978-1592476466) available free
with a bit of a search or $30 print.
I am discovering how cursed by Kant are we.
On 5/13/2011 03:06, Fred Dawson GoogleMail wrote:
>>From the BBC
> "This is an experiment. No real cancers are involved. But that's the point.
> We're going to see if we can make a game of pure chance look like something
> real and meaningful.
> Why? Because this week an official report in the UK stated that radiation
> from nuclear power stations does not cause increased levels of childhood
> A conspiracy, allege critics. Statistical lies, say others. The problem is
> obvious, they argue.
> The Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE),
> first investigated the question 25 years ago. It's still at it.
> And the reason, both for some people's scepticism and for COMARE's 25-year
> struggle to find a definitive answer, is the role of chance.
> Can we recreate the problem? Here goes."
> continues at
> Fred Dawson
> New Malden
> 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
More information about the RadSafe