People with a science/technology background don't seem to get it!
Like other religions, anti-nuclear-ism is based on faith. If their
"prophets" say there is a 75% increase in cancer rate near nuclear plants,
who are we to question it? In our culture, most of us have learned to at
least tolerate religions other than our own. Why not extend this attitude
to Norm and others of his faith? Forget about mathematics, statistics, and
scientific logic. Such tools are irrelevant to the true believer. In their
world, facts are whatever you sincerely believe them to be.
Perhaps to many, the idea of faith-based science might seem
oxymoronic. Just keep in mind that Mary Baker Eddy did pretty well with
the concept.
----- Original Message -----
From: Vincent A King <slavak@gj.net>
To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: TFP update article, E Magazine
> Richard:
>
> If you're expecting a substantive answer from Norm on this one, you'll be
waiting for a long time. I've posed similar questions to him, such as:
>
> -how are these individuals exposed to harmful doses when there is no
measured radiation/radioactive material increase anywhere?
>
> -why aren't these harmful effects found to a much greater degree in areas
of higher natural background, since higher radiation doses are not just
suspected, but are actually measurable - no guesswork involved?
>
> Of course, Norm has no way to answer these questions unless he ignores the
facts and science behind radiation measurements and health effects. He
would rather push his philosophical opposition to nuclear power, citing some
speculative, mysterious, "undiscovered" mechanism for causation (and hoping
in the mean time to convince us poor, misled, unenlightened barbarians to
reject the ominous conspiracy that has duped us).
>
> It seems kind of silly, to me anyway, for him to keep pushing this
nonsense in a forum for people whose profession is radiation health and
protection and who are experts at the actual mechanisms involved. The
"revelations" he continually sends to Radsafe remind me of the suggestion
for NASA to send astronauts to explore the sun, but do it at night so they
wouldn't burn up.
>
> In short, I'm sure Norm is a nice guy, and I have nothing against him
personally (except maybe his intellectual dishonesty in not dealing in
facts) but don't expect much in the way of a technical response on this
question. His main function on Radsafe is to keep us "informed" of the
latest anti-nuclear propaganda.
>
> Regards to all,
>
> Vincent King
> Grand Junction, CO
>
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: "Richard L. Hess" <lists@richardhess.com>
> Reply-To: "Richard L. Hess" <lists@richardhess.com>
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:33:58 -0700
>
> >At 11:20 AM 9/13/2002 -0400, Norman Cohen wrote:
> >
> >> > Childhood cancer rates jumped 75 percent in the San Louis Obispo,
> >> > Calif., area after a reactor opened there.
> >
> >Hi, Norman,
> >
> >Could you please explain the relationship between the reactor and the
> >childhood cancers?
> >
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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/
************************************************************************
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/