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

Re: cosmic rays

To: Gary Isenhower <garyi@BCM.TMC.EDU>
Subject: Re: cosmic rays
From: Joel Baumbaugh <baumbaug@NOSC.MIL>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:19:11 -0700
Cc: "radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
In-Reply-To: <3D981F77.A1EABAB5@bcm.tmc.edu>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0209292139310.27552-100000@unixs1.cis.pitt.edu><3D9865D8.A9265785@pacbell.net>
Reply-To: Joel Baumbaugh <baumbaug@NOSC.MIL>
Sender: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Gary,

These cosmic rays (and progeny) are probably thought to be "natural and organic" by the anti-nukes - so that makes them ok...

Joel Baumbaugh (baumbaug@noscl.mil)
SSC-SD

At 10:55 AM 9/30/2002 +0100, Gary Isenhower wrote:

I can't help laughing at the thought of radical anti-nuke folks coming
across this little factoid. I think they would most likely "shield"
themselves in an assurance that its just another lie from the nuclear
industry, or that its safe because its natural. The alternative,
accepting the fact for what it is, is more than some of them could bear
in a conscious state.
    _______________________________________________

        Gary Isenhower
        713-798-8353
        garyi@bcm.tmc.edu

References:
- Re: cosmic rays
  - From: BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>
- Re: cosmic rays
  - From: john grant <grantjoh@pacbell.net>
- Re: cosmic rays
  - From: Gary Isenhower <garyi@BCM.TMC.EDU>

Prev by Date: Re: cosmic rays
Next by Date: Re: cosmic rays
Prev by thread: Re: cosmic rays
Next by thread: Re: cosmic rays
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread