Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Nag
People blindly repeat the above, who have no clue what they are talking about. Dismissing the risks outright, is pure ignorance.
First off - perhaps you could supply your educational, scientific and/or medical credentials. Perhaps you have more credibility than four esteemed scientists/doctors at UCSF, one of the premier medical and imaging centers in the world who share a slightly different opinion on the subject from you.
But go on believing what you wish, leaving us paranoid and ignorant folks as the only ones doubting the TSA's glowing credentials and expertise. |
And simply accepting that there is danger just because somebody THINKS there might be a potential problem?
If that is all you have, I am certainly not concerned. They are raising possibilities. They are calling for an impartial panel to look at it. Do you have a copy of that panel's report? Or has it even been formed yet? As soon as they declare that there IS a real problem, I'll believe it.
You got the paranoid part right. There are all kinds of dangers we breathe in, drink and eat that are real and those that are not. I believe the risk of 2nd hand smoke is real. I don't believe this one is real yet. That is, unless you do have proof. Great men used to believe we couldn't go below the level of the atom but we have done that. The sound barrier could not be broken either. BTDT. Just because they are great men of science doesn't automatically mean we should worship and swallow whole each of their concerns. By all means, we should have an independent panel evaluate it. I don't say no to that. I don't believe that simply because someone in the top of their field raises a concern I should drop everything and follow their doubts about something WITHOUT proper tests. Again, if you have something more concrete than concerns, I welcome your input.