[ RadSafe ] Re: Nukes are Green

[Syd H. Levine]

First, there is NOT a consensus among geophysicists that global warming is 
anything to worry about.  The only consensus is among certain geophysicists 
receiving grant money for global warming research.  Second, science is not a 
matter of consensus.  There used to be a consensus that the world was flat, 
decidedly bad science it turns out.  But then, I am not surprised at your 
position on global warming, John.  There is something scary under every 
rock...LNT, global warming, DU, etc., etc.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
To: "Dimiter Popoff" <didi at tgi-sci.com>; "Jerry Cohen" 
<jjcohen at prodigy.net>; <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 1:33 PM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: Nukes are Green


> If you relie only on your own senses, what is the use
> of having scientists to do studies?  When you went to
> college and studies science and engineering, did you
> accept everything you were taught?
>
> My point is that at some point you either you do or do
> not believe experts.  If you do not believe in global
> warming or the safety of nuclear power, what is your
> criteria?  If environmentalist do or do not believe in
> global warming or nuclear power, what do you think
> their criteria are?
>
> If there is a perponderance of evidence that global
> warming a real pheonenom or that nuclear power is
> safe, is that satisfactory?
>
> --- Dimiter Popoff <didi at tgi-sci.com> wrote:
>> > ... trust their work?  If not, why not?
>>
>> Because of the weather.... :-)
>>
>> Do you have a particular study in mind which I
>> should trust?
>>
>> Or do you trust the media who tell you there is a
>> number
>> of studies which are to be trusted?
>>
>> I personally tend to trust my own senses...
>> (and the thermometer I have outside).
>>
>> > If nuclear engineers and regulatory agencies say
>> > nuclear power is safe, do you believe them?  If
>> not,
>> > why not?
>>
>> Oh it obviously is safe enough, has done a good job
>> for decades
>> now. If humans misuse it is their fault, not of the
>> technology.
>> Kitchen knives can be a deadly weapon, why not take
>> into
>> preventive custody everyone who posesses one.
>>
>> Dimiter
>>
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Dimiter Popoff               Transgalactic
>> Instruments
>>
>> http://www.tgi-sci.com
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> > Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
>> > From: John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
>> > Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Nukes are Green
>> > To: Dimiter Popoff <didi at tgi-sci.com>, Jerry Cohen
>> <jjcohen at prodigy.net>,
>> >   radsafe at radlab.nl
>> >
>> > I guess the question is if scientist trained in
>> > climatology and geophysics believe it is
>> occurring, do
>> > you trust their work?  If not, why not?
>> >
>> > If nuclear engineers and regulatory agencies say
>> > nuclear power is safe, do you believe them?  If
>> not,
>> > why not?
>> >
>> > --- Dimiter Popoff <didi at tgi-sci.com> wrote:
>> > > We have come to a point where the vast
>> disagreement
>> > > between reality and its
>> > > media presentation is unlikely to be overcome
>> > > without a major crisis.
>> > > "Global warming" has been repeated so many times
>> > > that there is
>> > > barely a soul who would question it, no matter
>> what
>> > > we see when
>> > > we look through the window (looks more like a
>> coming
>> > > ice age to me).
>> > > Nuclear has been a swear word for decades, just
>> > > watch them turn it
>> > > within less than a month or two if they really
>> want
>> > > to (whoever
>> > > are those /is that in control of the media, and
>> > > please save me
>> > > the talk of having free speech etc.).
>> > >
>> > > Of course I am against any sort of lies, too.
>> The
>> > > real question is
>> > > whether there is anything we can do about it, I
>> wish
>> > > I had
>> > > a solution to offer...
>> > >
>> > > Dimiter
>> > >
>> > > . . .
>> >
>> > +++++++++++++++++++
>> > "Embarrassed, obscure and feeble sentences are
>> generally, if not always, the result of embarrasse
>> > Hugh Blair, 1783
>> >
>> > -- John
>> > John Jacobus, MS
>> > Certified Health Physicist
>> > e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com
>>
>>
>
> +++++++++++++++++++
> "Embarrassed, obscure and feeble sentences are generally, if not always, 
> the result of embarrassed, obscure and feeble thought."
> Hugh Blair, 1783
>
> -- John
> John Jacobus, MS
> Certified Health Physicist
> e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball.
> http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing list
> radsafe at radlab.nl
>
> For information on how to subscribe/unsubscribe and other settings visit:
> http://radlab.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
>