[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re[2]: Cassini and "60 Minutes"





Putting aside for the moment that TV magazines are a form of entertainment and
are an outlet for indiviudual and media opinion, the question raised on Cassini
--but never answered on Radsafe or on "60 Minutes"--is not how safe or dangerous
plutonium is but rather how much risk the government is allowed to take with
citizens.  I believe the dangers of plutonium are well understood and
exaggerated way out of proportion to other risks.  But to put the question in
different terms, how would you feel about launching 72 pounds of liquid Saran or
concentrated Ebola?  Assume, for the moment, that the scientific community had
some reason to do this that was neither more nor less compelling than the
Cassini mission.  Should the government bow to public concern by lay-people (how
many), to informed concern by scientists (how many), to assurances from rocket
scientists or HPs (how many), or scare tactics by the media?  Except for scare
tactics, I've been pondering this question since the segment aired and I don't
know the answer.

bill
william.kolb@faa.dot.gov  
_______________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cassini and "60 Minutes"
From:    Rick_Strickert@radian.com at Internet
Date:    10/6/97  7:02 PM

Sandy Perle asked:

> Anyone else have different observations?