| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| Sender: |
|
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:42:33 -0600 |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed |
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Thanks for the report.
The "sound science" argument is propaganda. Propaganda is a way of
presenting your position that appeals to emotion and not fact and
logic. The term sounds nice and catchy but it is meaningless. You either
believe what science says or you do not. Sound Science in the context
used at the hearing for me means "I will begin to believe you when I see
dead bodies and until then I won't believe what you say because I will
be losing money. If there are dead bodies, is saving them worth what I
can gain ?"
Bringing up the health of ones own children is very questionable. There
are all sorts of studies that show the health affects of air pollution.
I have not been in the fray and am puzzled by the "where to measure"
issue. I understand that the further away from the source the less
likely to exceed the standard. With the air pollutants that Iowa
regulates now, the standard is at the property line. There may be
something about the particulars of the chemical in question I don't
understand; otherwise, this is so different from what is normally done
as to be a blatant disregard for normal air regulations.
I had to work last night so I am very grateful for the report. Maybe I
will make it to the Mason City one.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Make your voice heard! Find out how to get Take Action Alerts
and other important Sierra Club messages by email at:
http://www.sierraclub.org/email
|
|
|