<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More nonsense nuclides in the media.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/</link>
	<description>An independent scientist's observations on society, technology, energy, science and the environment.         "Modern science has been a voyage into the unknown, with a lesson in humility waiting at every stop. Many passengers would rather have stayed home." - Carl Sagan</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:19:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Drbuzz0</title>
		<link>http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/#comment-153</link>
		<dc:creator>Drbuzz0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:58:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/#comment-153</guid>
		<description>Um.. couldn&#039;t they look in an encyclopedia?  Even wikipedia?  Or even do a Google search?

Or maybe *gasp* contact somebody who knows something.   I mean for one thing there&#039;s the Health Physics Society which has a damn good outreach program.   I wonder if they would respond to an email that said &quot;Hi I&#039;m a reporter and I am writing a story about this stuff called Lawrencium-103.  What can you tell me about it and any potential dangers?&quot;

I tend to think they would respond promptly, especially if the email was better written than above.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um.. couldn&#8217;t they look in an encyclopedia?  Even wikipedia?  Or even do a Google search?</p>
<p>Or maybe *gasp* contact somebody who knows something.   I mean for one thing there&#8217;s the Health Physics Society which has a damn good outreach program.   I wonder if they would respond to an email that said &#8220;Hi I&#8217;m a reporter and I am writing a story about this stuff called Lawrencium-103.  What can you tell me about it and any potential dangers?&#8221;</p>
<p>I tend to think they would respond promptly, especially if the email was better written than above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Grimm</title>
		<link>http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/#comment-132</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Grimm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:26:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/#comment-132</guid>
		<description>How much radiation education did you get in high school?  Likely little or none.  Even in college, unless you go into physics it is unlikely that you got any radiation education.  Most journalists get absolutely zero education about radiation.  They are may or may not be stupid, but they are just palin ignorant.  It is important to contact the journalist and try to educate them in the basics of radiation.  Properly done they will change. It may take awhile for them to change, but it can happen (not all, but the better percentage will change).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How much radiation education did you get in high school?  Likely little or none.  Even in college, unless you go into physics it is unlikely that you got any radiation education.  Most journalists get absolutely zero education about radiation.  They are may or may not be stupid, but they are just palin ignorant.  It is important to contact the journalist and try to educate them in the basics of radiation.  Properly done they will change. It may take awhile for them to change, but it can happen (not all, but the better percentage will change).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fifi</title>
		<link>http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/#comment-129</link>
		<dc:creator>Fifi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:02:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enochthered.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/more-nonsense-nuclides-in-the-media/#comment-129</guid>
		<description>Even so, anything -103 is either stable Rh-103 or short lived, at most a few weeks for Ru-103 and Pd-103.

http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc6.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even so, anything -103 is either stable Rh-103 or short lived, at most a few weeks for Ru-103 and Pd-103.</p>
<p><a href="http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc6.html" rel="nofollow">http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc6.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
