RE: Muckerheide's request for science?

["Jim Muckerheide" <jmuckerheide@cnts.wpi.edu>]

John,



As you know, a "debate" format isn't "science." The data and analyses

are in the literature, with the "weight" of credible and consistent

results - not debate tactic pseudo-science arguments by Lubin, Samet,

Field, et al. to mislead the "politicians," elected and unelected.

Cohen's credible data and analyses stand up, and dozens of other studies

produce credible and consistent results.



Regards, Jim





-----Original Message-----

From:	John Williams



Mr. Muckerheide -



I agree with this article below that Dr Field provided.  I think it 

provides a good overview of the case in question.  You weigh 

the "science" provided by Dr. Becker versus the science provided by 

Field in the debate.  I would rule in favor of Field's argument at 

this time.



http://www.ntp.org.uk/951-TUD.pdf



John Williams



Sent by Law  Mail

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

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. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/