Re: Crows

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>]

Susan, Ruth, Ted, & anyone else who cares,

    I wish we lived in a world where Susan is right, but it seems 

more likely that Ruth's views reflect reality. Wouldn't it be nice if 

sufficiently strong scientific evidence, per se, could convince the 

political establishment. If all it took to influence policy were strong 

scientific evidence, then LNT would have been discarded long ago.

Unfortunately, too many politicians, bureaucrats, and "scientists" 

are feeding at the LNT trough. Unless they could be convinced that 

it would be in their best political interests to change their attitude, 

it is not very likely that the situation will change. 



> I suggest that this is the transition between world views, for example

> from an earth-centered solar system to one that is sun-centered.  Strong

> beliefs opposed that too, but the science was incontrovertible.  If the

> scientific evidence against LNT and favoring hormesis is sufficiently

> strong, eventually the political establishment will accept the

> scientific truth.



From: Susan Gawarecki <loc@ICX.NET>



>Why aren't the regulators buying this?  Because (a) they apparently do not

>think scientifically, (b) they seem to be scared to death of activist

>opinion,which they call "public opinion,"and(c) the decisions are made by

>political appointees, who are generally selected on the basis of campaign

>contributions or long-standing support.  This is true for both political

parties.About 25 years ago EPA had excellent evidence for making the ozone

>ambient air standard more lenient, and they immediately got slapped down.



From: Ruth Weiner, Ph. D. ruthweiner@aol.com













************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.