[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Objectivity



Howard,

Since when is the work of a scientist based on popularity.  I always thought

that the process involved observation, development of an hypothesis and

testing of the hypothesis.  And very often being able to repeat the study.

I know Dr. Cohen's work is good, but there are some who question the

assumptions and the results.  Their opinions must also be respected and not

dismissed.  His offering of a prize is grandstanding, particularly when he

is the judge.  



And, Jim, you do not have to respond to this posting.  We all know how you

feel, and know that you can tie up the list server with your postings.



-- John 

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist 

3050 Traymore Lane

Bowie, MD  20715-2024



E-mail:  jenday1@email.msn.com (H)      



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

From: hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net

[mailto:hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net]

Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 8:29 PM

To: Jacobus, John (OD/ORS); radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Objectivity





John,

You miss the point. Not a contest, but the degree to which anyone can be

intellectually honest (because we all rationalize), is a continual challenge

to any scientist. Bernie Cohen won the highest praise from the most critical

of scientists.



Howard Long



"Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" wrote:



> Howard,

> Since Dr. Cohen would be the judge of whether he was wrong or not, I

wonder

> if it was a fair contest.

. . .

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

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/