[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NIRS RESPONSE TO MY RADSAFE POSTING
I just can't resist. Let's see -- according to Ms. Weiner:
1. "If the shoe fits, it usually pinches a little." In other words, to
object is to admit. While a good portion of the postings to RADSAFE are the
former, I doubt those who post them would characterize them as the latter.
Let us all read Ms. Weiner's future postings with her grandfather's words in
mind.
2. "Oil money funds anti-nukes." An amusing thought, but certainly only a
gibbering id. . . Oops, I'm sorry, you're serious, aren't you?
3. "The NIRS budget, while not huge, is certainly not small." Each year,
Sandia probably equals NIRS's FY 1998 budget in wasted copy paper (including
the paycheck for a particular Sandia employee). But, then, this calculus also
equates statistical insignificance (as in "statistically insignificant excess
cancers") with zero.
4. "To the best of my knowledge, they have (or at least had in 1984) no
technical or scientific expertise at all -- they generally tried to hire it."
Either Ms. Weiner is working for Sandia pro bono (a fair wage for her day's
work to be sure and a savings in paper to boot), or she was hired for other
than technical or scientific expertise (let's see -- clerical, janitorial -- I
know -- she's in Transportation Systems, so she's an auto mechanic, but, no,
that's technical. . . hmmm.). (With apologies to all clerks, janitors, and
auto mechanics.)
Now, how does that fit? Pinch anywhere?
Seriously, though, while the Ruth Weiners of the world are unable to believe
that NIRS has done and continues to do a lot of good work for a lot of good
people, you don't have to agree with everything they do to know we are better
off with them than without them. After all, if Ms. Weiner is any indication,
do we really want the Sandias of the world running things unopposed?
Go get 'em, Michael!
Glenn A. Carlson, P.E., JD
St. Peters, MO
GACMail98@aol.com
----------------------------------------
In a message dated 98-05-01 18:37:39 EDT, you write:
<< Subj: NIRS RESPONSE TO MY RADSAFE POSTING
Date: 98-05-01 18:37:39 EDT
From: rfweine@sandia.gov (Ruth Weiner)
Sender: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Reply-to: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)
---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes
---------------------------
From: nirsnet@igc.apc.org at hubsmtp
Date: 4/30/98 2:15PM
To: Ruth Weiner at PO821CC2
Subject: your comments
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Dear RADSAFERs:
I thought you all might be interested in the attached charming note I
received
from NIRS. As my grandfather used to say, "If the shoe fits, i usually
pinches
a little."
Clearly only my own opinion
Ruth F. Weiner
Transportation Systems Department
Sandia National Laboratories
505-844-4791
fax 505-844-0244
rfweine@sandia.gov
______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________
Subject: your comments
Author: nirsnet@igc.apc.org at hubsmtp
Date: 4/30/98 2:15 PM
Dear Ms. Weiner:
"nirs.org," eh? Let me tell all you RADSAFERs something about NIRS, the
Nuclear
Information Resource Service. This is what used to be known as a nuclear
intervenor organization: they intervene on behalf of challengers to nuclear
power plant siting, and generally on behalf of anti-nuclear groups, in
administrative and legal proceedings. In 1984 (believe it or not) I was
interviewed for the position of Executive Director of NIRS. During the course
of
the interview, I learned that 70% of the NIRS budget came from a member of
the
Rockfeller family. An eye-opener to me, as a naive academic, but probably not
news to those who realize that oil money funds anti-nukes.
Apparently you are still a naive academic. While it is true a large portion
of the NIRS budget back then came from the Rockefeller family (but several
members, not just one), calling that oil money is inane. In fact, the last
time I heard that argument it was from the Soviet govt complaining about
NIRS... Third and fourth generation Rockefeller money is no more oil money
than describing money I may give away from my grandfather's legacy as being
from the plumbers union (he was a plumber). None of the members of the
Rockefeller family who give to NIRS (and hundreds of other organizations of
all kinds, they are quite generous across the board) have any connection,
other than their family tree, to the oil industry. By the way, the
percentage of Rockefeller family contributions (all members) is
approximately 15% of our FY 1998 budget. To the best of my knowledge, NIRS
has never received any money from anyone actually affiliated with the oil
industry (energy industries tend to support each other, and of course, some
oil companies have uranium interests--they really don't tend to fund groups
like ours). We certainly haven't knowingly accepted any money from the oil
industry, the gas industry, the coal industry or the renewables industry or
any other energy-related industry. Not that we wouldn't necessarily, at
least from renewables, which we support, but we haven't.
Needless to say, I
didn't take the job (I had no intention of taking it, but was curious about
the
organization). The NIRS budget, while not huge, is certainly not small.
Depends on what you consider small. Our FY 1998 budget is $470,000--that's
not much more than my counterpart at the NEI earns all for himself...
I am
absolutely appalled that NIRS propaganda should be treated as informative.
To
the best of my knowledge, they have (or at least had in 1984) no technical or
scientific expertise at all -- they generally tried to hire it.
Actually we have three scientists on our staff of six (admittedly no PhD's
however). But our function is not primarily research (our budget--see
above--doesn't pay for a lot of full-time PhDs); it is information
dissemination and networking. We work closely with many scientists, in many
fields, at other organizations and government (though I don't understand the
problem with hiring scientists either--isn't that what Sandia does?--who
help us, particularly on difficult technical issues--I should think that
would be an indication of the seriousness to which we insist on obtaining
credible, scientifically defensible information. I certainly think our
information is more accurate than most things coming out of Sandia....
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
NIRS
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <server@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Received: from rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (rly-zb05.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.5]) by
air-zb04.mail.aol.com (v42.4) with SMTP; Fri, 01 May 1998 18:37:39 -0400
Received: from romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu [128.174.74.24])
by rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id SAA19328;
Fri, 1 May 1998 18:37:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from server@localhost)
by romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA05333;
Fri, 1 May 1998 17:41:49 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:41:49 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199805012241.RAA05333@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Errors-To: melissa@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Originator: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Sender: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Ruth Weiner <rfweine@sandia.gov>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Subject: NIRS RESPONSE TO MY RADSAFE POSTING
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: RADSAFE Distribution List
>>