Re: 'Sound Science'? Bush close - see data.

[John Jacobus <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>]

So what do the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness

really do?  Hold meetings and agree that the rest of

the world does not listen to you?  Do you have any

outreach program to local communities?



I noticed that both Teller and Kearny have died

recently.  Who are you going to get to take their

places at future meetings?  May be Bush and Chaney

will be available next year.



--- Howard Long <hflong@pacbell.net> wrote:

> To Franz and nay-sayers to WMD pre-emption,

> 

> DDP has a tiny budget, funded only by small dues and

> sale of tapes-cds.

> 

> Martin Kamen (C 14), Teller, Kearny and other

> notables honored us by

> frequent attendance and participation, precisely

> because we try to prove

> wrong the thesis of every speaker - as the best of

> them do to themselves.

> 

> Please review data at www.oism.org/DDP and comment

> on specifics related to

> radiation safety. Bush actions support the nuclear

> industry as much as he

> can get through the politicized, self-interested

> bureaucracy.

> 

> Howard Long

> 

> ----- Original Message ----- 

> From: "Franz Schoenhofer"

> <franz.schoenhofer@chello.at>

> To: "Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>; "John

> Jacobus"

> <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>; "know_nukes"

> <know_nukes@yahoogroups.com>;

> "radsafe" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 3:00 PM

> Subject: AW: 'Sound Science'? Bush closer than big

> government promoters.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

> Von: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]Im Auftrag

> von Howard Long

> Gesendet: Montag, 01. März 2004 04:24

> An: John Jacobus; know_nukes; radsafe

> Betreff: Re: 'Sound Science'? Bush closer than big

> government promoters.

> 

> ---------------------------------------------

> 

> Howard,

> 

> Your list of (unnamed) Nobelists and other persons

> you obviously regard as

> the "creme de la creme" of radiation protection and

> other sciences, confirms

> for me only one thing: Doctors of Disaster

> Preparedness must have really

> great funds. Where do they come from? Maybe from the

> (Bush) administration?

> In earlier days, just a few hundreds of years ago,

> science was done by

> mostly poor scientists, even professors at the

> university were not free of

> financial problems. You should be aware, that times

> have changed. A

> professor or another scientist without funds will

> within a very short time

> loose his reputation, because there will not be any

> research done at his

> institute. His duty is to raise funds, the work is

> done by his

> collaborators. How to raise funds? He has to propose

> interesting projects.

> If the government or administration asks for a

> confirmation that the

> climatic problems caused by CO2 are nothing but a

> propaganda trick of those

> who want to obstruct the US economy, then I bet that

> so-called "Research

> Institutes" stand in row to receive funds.

> 

> This in no way restricted to the USA. We know all to

> well, that so-called

> scientists are easily and well manipulated by funds

> and other kind of

> pressures. A special kind of pressure is "ethics",

> where obviously

> nobel-prize winners can be easily manipulated. This

> made a nobel-prize

> winner for his work on behaviour of grey-geese

> (Konrad Lorenz, now after

> decades having been recognized to have been a

> fervent supporter of Nazi

> theories, and whose theories are now totally

> rejected by his collegues) an

> "authority" in the fight against the Austrian

> nuclear power plant. What you

> do is just the contrary - to name Muckerheide as an

> authority for the Bush

> administration is obviously to you something

> positive, but I guess to the

> majority of radiation safety people totally

> negative.

> 

> Come on, please do not spread political propaganda,

> because just by chance

> the current USA administration pretends to do

> something you like. How many

> nuclear power plants have been built since the Bush

> administration took

> over? Is the WIPP open? etc. etc......

> 

> Franz

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Doctors for Disaster Preparedness presentations,

> 18/year since '93, by many

> Nobelists, + Teller, Pollycove, Muckerheide, Singer,

>  Robinson (to name a

> few) have given critical science basis supporting

> most Bush actions on

> missle defense, "The Myth of Global Warming",

> anthrax and nerve poison and

> nuclear bomb program preemption, nuclear waste

> disposal, etc.

> 

> To confirm most easily, go to www.oism.org/DDP .

> Then compare the Bush

> position with that of perpetual employment for

> regulators (promoted below).

> Which is closer to "Sound Science"?

> 

> Howard Long

> 

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>

> To: "know_nukes" <know_nukes@yahoogroups.com>;

> "radsafe"

> <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 4:03 PM

> Subject: Article: Beware 'Sound Science.' It's

> Doublespeak for Trouble

> 

> 

> The following appeared in the opinion section of

> today's Washington Post.  While it may not directly

> relate to discussions about radiation safety and

> policy, I thought would be of interest.  It goes to

> the question of how fair government policies are

> developed.  To me, it again shows that policies,

> whether they be on climate control, nuclear waste,

> etc., are not formulated without political input.

> 

> The original appeared at

>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13994-2004Feb27.html

> 

> ---------------------------

> Beware 'Sound Science.' It's Doublespeak for Trouble

> 

> By Chris Mooney

> 

> Sunday, February 29, 2004; Page B02

> 

> When George W. Bush and members of his

> administration

> talk about environmental policy, the phrase "sound

> science" rarely goes unuttered. On issues ranging

> from

> climate change to the storage of nuclear waste in

> Nevada's Yucca Mountain, our president has assured

> us

> that he's backing up his decisions with careful

> attention to the best available research.

> 

> It's not just Bush: Republican lawmakers in the

> House

> of Representatives, led by Reps. Chris Cannon of

> Utah

> and Jim Gibbons of Nevada, have announced the

> formation of a "Sound Science Caucus" to ramp up the

> role of "empirical" and "peer reviewed" data in laws

> such as the Endangered Species Act. And last August

> the Office of Management and Budget unveiled a

> proposal to amplify the role of "peer review" in the

> evaluation of scientific research conducted by

> federal

> agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency

> (EPA).

> 

> It all sounds noble enough, but the phrases "sound

> science" and "peer review" don't necessarily mean

> what

> you might think. Instead, they're part of a lexicon

> used to put a pro-science veneer on policies that

> most

> of the scientific community itself tends to be up in

> arms about. In this Orwellian vocabulary, "peer

> review" isn't simply an evaluation by learned

> 

=== message truncated ===





=====

+++++++++++++++++++

"The care of human life and happiness . . . is the first and only legitimate object of good government."

Thomas Jefferson



-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com



__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

Yahoo! Search - Find what you.re looking for faster

http://search.yahoo.com

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

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/