If your intent is to 'wharehouse questions' in anticipation of someday answering them or in anticipation of someday once again going back again to 'mine for gold' - I'd say it was pretty thin ore and an occupation you will never satisfy ... My complaint with this question-asking per se is when it is used as a substitute for real research, when used as means to fear-mongering and exciting the public as means to notoriety, publication numbers and book sales. A diatribe on the general nature of science as 'just simply asking questions' lacks the complement side where researchers work hard to answer those questions and are not content to simply rest on their laurels. Some of us are in eternal pursuit of fact versus fiction and 'bad science', conjecture and hyperbole and find a plethora of 'useless material' published for whatever ulterior motive to be just so much muddying of the waters. Give us the stillness of a mind un-cluttered with all but the essentials of the problem to be studied or researched - a mind devoid of ulterior motives, politcal agendas, bias and 'noise', a mind capable of grasping the subtleties, interactions and complex couplings between components and elements - - IOW, I'd rather not be saddled with someone else's doubts, lame questions or self-imposed restrictions when solving a problem. Ditto for reading their sometimes long and detailed record of repeated failure (referring now to long and lengthy historical record often times *required* of a subordinate before being allowed to get 'hands on' and actually *solve* a problem) ... Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell McMahon" To: Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [EE]: Power Lines & Cancer FAQ. > > Russ penned: > > "Sometimes "good information" consists of more questions." > > Jim said > > > I would prefer silence in that case - I will (and can) conclude > > there is a dearth of *real info* from the silence ... > > > > To do otherwise is to create some much clutter and fodder (and tons > > of useless Google hits!) for the fear-mongerers who seek reputations > > via accrued face-time in the media ... > > Have you even LOOKED at the page ???? > This is part of an honest and competent attempt to advance knowledge re > interaction between biological systems and man made electrical fields. This > is a FAQ designed to inform typical inquirers. > > The WHOLE of Science (and I can feel the Karl Popper versus the rest > argument waiting in the wings here) consists of asking questions, getting > the best answers available and then asking better questions based on the > answers. If we are content with silence in the absence of absolute knowledge > then our worlds would be very quiet places AND there would be no known > consistent mechanism to increase the available knowledge (or noise level > :-) ). > > To switch metaphors, Rutherford said the Sciences consist of Physics and the > rest - and that all the rest is stamp collecting. I believe that ALL science > is stamp collecting (and cannot imagine why Rutheford would think > otherwise)(which may be why I don't have a Nobel prize :-) ). The mechanism > by which we try to find prettier or more obscurely located stamps is termed > "The Scientific Method". Without such a system our albums would be bare > indeed, whether in the area of EM fields or any other. > > > > Russell McMahon > -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body