[ RadSafe ] Sternglass -Galileo Parallel :-) RE: Drawing the line between science > andpseudo-science. (was Rational Thought) >
sjd at swcp.com
Mon Oct 10 20:41:38 CDT 2011
To reiterate what I said earlier today, Whyte's paper was a
test of the Cross hypothesis, which had to do with the health effects
of restricting oxygen for sick newborn infants. Whyte shows a rise
in infant mortality in England and Wales from 1951 to 1980, and a
rise in infant mortality in the United States from 1955 to
1979. These are the only three countries he studied. He does not
know what the rates were in any other countries, nor does he claim to
know. Whyte is obviously perplexed by this rise in mortality.
In the last section of his paper ("Alternative
Explanations"), he is still perplexed by the lack of a possible cause
for the rise in infant mortality. Then, in the *last paragraph* of
his paper, Whyte notes a possible environmental factor: the rise in
exposure to Sr-90 from atmospheric weapons testing. He also mentions
a rise in infant mortality in southern Germany in the wake of the
Chernobyl accident. He does not develop either of these points.
Whyte does not mention Sternglass anywhere in his
paper. The sole mention of Sternglass is in footnote 32, where Whyte
cites to Sternglass's lecture at the Hanford biology symposium in
1969. As I said earlier, Leonard Sagan largely destroyed
Busby asks below if anyone on RADSAFE has looked at Whyte's
paper. Well, I have. Busby is the one who needs to not merely look
at it but to *read* it, because it is patently obvious that he has
not. If he had read it he would know that Whyte did nothing that
"vindicated" Sternglass's claims. How can a researcher be said to
have vindicated someone's claims when he does not so much as mention
--- let alone discuss --- the other person's claims?
Finally, note that Busby does not explain how Whyte
vindicates Sternglass. Like a stuck record he merely repeats his
claim, apparently hoping that if he says it enough times people will
get sick of listening to him and accept his falsehood in a vain
attempt to get him to stop talking.
At 02:12 AM 10/10/2011, you wrote:
>When I say he [Sternglass] was generally correct I ask you to look
>at the data. You can find it in the R Whyte BMJ paper I cited. Have
>any of you even looked?
More information about the RadSafe