Re: Reward

[Radiationhealth@aol.com]

In a message dated 3/1/00 11:24:56 AM Central Standard Time, blc+@pitt.edu 
writes:

<< -- They did not claim that my analyses failed to demonstrate that
 their proposed explanations for our discrepancy were very highly
 implausible. They never suggested that they should receive the
 reward. >>

Dr. Cohen, 

My reading of their papers and letters leads me to think that they claimed 
(no questions about it) your analyses failed to demonstrate that their 
proposed explanations were very highly implausible.  In addition, I would 
call several side-by-side papers and several side-by-side joint replies 
publishing a dialogue correspondence.  Obviously, if the scientists did not 
agree with your answer (and yours with theirs), it would not be a very 
enjoyable experience writing a "joint" paper with you.    I am just voicing 
my opinion that I do not think you previously adhered to the agreement you 
made.  For some obvious reason, I cannot picture Dr. Lubin or Dr. Smith 
sending you a letter requesting money.  Maybe, the money can be donated to 
the American Lung Association in the name of the researchers, who took the 
time out from their own research efforts to respond to your request.

That is all I am saying on these issue.  Obviously, you see things from a 
different perspective then I do.  I repect your position, but disagree with 
it.  I certainly would not take your challenge with your previous track 
record.  Well, back to work.
 
Jeff Klugh
radiationhealth@aol.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html