[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Union of Concerned Scientists
As I've stated before, I'm always suspicious about an organization whose name implies
disrespect for anyone who disagrees with their views. Who will oppose them? The
"Unions of Unconcerned Scientists;" "Citizens For Government Waste:" "The American
Taxdodgers Association"?
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Curies forever.
Bill Lipton
Liptonw@dteenergy.com
Steven Dapra wrote:
> Feb. 23
>
> Norm Cohen has made much of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) on
> RADSAFE, and has posted links to its website on at least one occasion.
>
> Rothman and Lichter (1982) report on a study they conducted about the
> different views of scientists, the media, and the public concerning nuclear
> power. Their "random sample of 741 scientists contained only one who
> listed any affiliation with UCS. On that basis, we estimate that fewer
> than 200 scintists among the 130,000 listed in 'American Men and Women of
> Science' were affiliated with UCS when we conducted our study. The [UCS]
> would not provide the information we needed to poll its membership, so we
> have no data on the training or background of its members."
>
> In light of the rather considerable influence the UCS exercises with the
> popular press, some might consider this apparent dearth of scientists in
> UCS, and the UCS' -- secrecy, shall we say? -- to be disconcerting.
>
> According the the UCS' web site, "UCS was founded in 1969 by faculty
> members and students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who were
> concerned about the misuse of science and technology in society. Their
> statement called for the redirection of scientific research to pressing
> environmental and social problems.
>
> "From that beginning, UCS has become a powerful voice for change."
> (edit)
>
> With its agenda for "change," the UCS sounds like more than a mere group
> of scientists. It also makes no secret of its agenda of disarmament and
> its opposition to space-based defense (High Frontier).
>
> Apparently the only requirement for membership is the willingness to part
> with $35.00. No requirement that applicants be scientists, or even know
> anything systematic about science.
>
> Steven Dapra
> sjd@swcp.com
>
> REFERENCE
>
> Rothman, S. and Lichter, S. R. The Nuclear Energy Debate: Scientists,the
> Media and the Public. Public Opinion 5(4):47-52; 8/9-1982.
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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/