[ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science and pseudo-science. (was Rational Thought)

Jerry Cohen jjc105 at yahoo.com
Wed Oct 5 14:44:28 CDT 2011

     This is not intended to dispute what you say, but just for the record, 
could you please cite some of the references supporting hormesis that you 
believe to have a shaky scientific basis, or are complete nonsense.

From: "Harrison, Tony" <Tony.Harrison at dphe.state.co.us>
To: "radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Wed, October 5, 2011 7:02:22 AM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science and pseudo-science. (was 
Rational Thought)

Interesting blog here:


The example given is the debate between evolution and "creation science" but the 
arguments apply just as much to anti- (or pro-) nuke opinions.  Take a moment to 
think about what sort of evidence it would take to convince you that your 
beliefs are false, and then see if such evidence exists.

Busby's citation of Sternglass et alia is laughable, but so are some of the 
pro-hormesis papers cited here over the years.  Both just show that the 
peer-review process is far from perfect.  Too many propagandists out there, and 
not enough scientists.
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: 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 

More information about the RadSafe mailing list