[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/