Re: Dirty bombs(more on the LNT)

[Steven Dapra <sjd@swcp.com>]

December 23



	There is evidence and there is interpretation of the evidence.  Let's keep

in mind the role of philosophy as people draw their conclusions.  (Written

in reply to Ruth Weiner's posting -- reproduced below.)



Steven Dapra



sjd@swcp.com



--------------



We had an experience recently that sheds a new light on public

"radiophobia" or whatever one wants to call the prevalent anti-nuclear

sentiments.  A clerk in a local bookstore, getting into a very minor

controversy about something nuclear, allowed as how "we were entitled to

our opinions and she was entitled to hers."  In other words, she, and I'm

sure many others, think that being anti-nuke is purely a matter of opinion

or preference, like being a Democrat rather than a Republican.  A similar

argument is made by "creationists."



This is not fear, or lack of trust, or lack of understanding.  It is sort

of "I'll think what I want to think, regardless of external factual

evidence."  I believe this is the battle we fight , just as Clarence Darrow

fought at the Tennessee "Monkey Trial" and much like the battles fought

over school integration.



I am somewhat at a loss as to how one addresses this, except by pointing

otu that adhering to an opinion that is contradicted by evidence is

ultimately cotnrary to the public welfare.



----------



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

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/