a response
- Archived: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:22:00 -0400 (EDT)
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:13:21 -0400
- From: Frank Frable <flfrable@seidata.com>
- Subject: a response
- X-topic: Introductions/Goals
<html>
As a member of a very small town planning commission, I am most<br>
concerned about environmental pseudo-science and environmental<br>
politicized science. The initial dialogue seems not to address<br>
this problem. May I suggest as a starting point for any future<br>
dialogues that the science behind a problem or or the science used<br>
in the solution of a problem be scrutinized extremely carefully.<br>
It will need to be true science free of political correctness, free<br>
of a political agenda and free of "bleeding hearts" spin.<br>
<br>
Cynicism and the Government go hand in hand and with some of the<br>
government's environmental boondoggles the problems need to be<br>
carefully identified as problems and the solutions need to be fact<br>
based, realistic and doable in the context of our ever growing<br>
population. I, too, thought that the initial dialogue was vague<br>
and primarily "feel good" commentary. All of my comments may be<br>
seen as non contraceptive criticism. EPA decisions based on public<br>
involvement and reflecting public policy will only be as effective<br>
as the correctness of the premises on which they are based.<br>
<br>
Frank L. Frable<br>
<br>
</html>
|
Date
|