Re: Hanford Site Cleanup Standards

[BLHamrick@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 9/2/2003 6:17:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, 

liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM writes:

Like it or not, perception is

reality

Whose perception?  The majority's?  Would that be the same majority that 

believed that "separate, but equal" was just in 1896?  Or the majority that would 

have kept the sun revolving around the earth in 1615?



Those are two separate questions - not meant to be considered in concert, but 

in contrast.



A moral decision regarding how to treat humanity as a whole is extremely 

subjective, therefore perception-driven, but decisions regarding how our physical 

reality manifests itself are driven by empirical evidence.



I can believe with all my heart that the earth is flat, but it's not.  My 

ignorance or stubborness may persuade me to fight for laws that decree the earth 

is flat, but it's not.



The fact that over 50 years of fear-mongering and scare tactics have led the 

public and our lawmakers to demonize all radiation and radioactive material 

may result in a legal reality that collectively costs us billions of dollars per 

year, but it won't do anything to change the physical reality that we simply 

don't know if low levels of radiation are harmful, innocuous or beneficial.



My personal experience has been that the public and lawmakers do not 

understand that the laws and guidance governing radiation and radioactive materials 

usage are making an "assumption" that low levels of radiation are harmful - they 

believe that it is known that they are, and they make public policy (not 

physical reality) decisions on this basis.  They are working from a faulty 

premise.  They may "perceive" that it is known that low levels of radiation down to 

zero are harmful, but they are wrong - it is not known whether these levels are 

harmful, innocuous, or beneficial.  I, personally, believe it is unethical, 

as a scientist, to simply accept this gross misperception as inevitable.



Barbara